It doesn't particularly make sense to use another full featured receiver or integrated amp to power the biamped speakers - a simple class D "power-amp" with volume control, and unless you really want more knobs with which to fiddle and maybe flashing LED displays, etc, a cheap and nasty PLLXO in either a small hobby box or heat-shrunk into the patch cords should more than suffice.
Of course, since the subject of investing in new components has entered the conversation, as I mentioned earlier, many of the newer generations of surround receivers have the full digital XO / true biamping capability built in, as well as far superior bass management and ease of set-up calibration all in a single box, While I might yet change my surround speakers, as my room won't easily accommodate Atmos- or whatever is next after that, I doubt I'll need to upgrade from the Onkyo- and even if I did, I'd never give up the flexibility and incredible ease of set-up this one has.
If you're a big fan of the Yammie brand, that's great - I've been very happy with several in my past, and recently bought a small HT unit for a friend that was re-gifted to my son. I'd be surprised if Onkyo was alone in offering active bi-amping capability- it'd just take some care reading of the promo materials and manual downloads to ascertain which models.
Edit- just taking a few minutes to fact check myself on this, it looks like this may well be a case of chasing for higher numbers of surround channels - now up to 9.2, or more?- has shifted the goal posts a bit, and that the digits
XO and bi-amp feature may have been a fleeting offering. If so, my apologies for cloudying the waters. If the goal is to achieve proper Low and High pass filtering for active bi-amping, several approaches have already been advanced.
And, IINM, the Dayton is rated T 2@75w into 4ohms, and 150 into 8 when bridged - which is how I run mine.
Of course, since the subject of investing in new components has entered the conversation, as I mentioned earlier, many of the newer generations of surround receivers have the full digital XO / true biamping capability built in, as well as far superior bass management and ease of set-up calibration all in a single box, While I might yet change my surround speakers, as my room won't easily accommodate Atmos- or whatever is next after that, I doubt I'll need to upgrade from the Onkyo- and even if I did, I'd never give up the flexibility and incredible ease of set-up this one has.
If you're a big fan of the Yammie brand, that's great - I've been very happy with several in my past, and recently bought a small HT unit for a friend that was re-gifted to my son. I'd be surprised if Onkyo was alone in offering active bi-amping capability- it'd just take some care reading of the promo materials and manual downloads to ascertain which models.
Edit- just taking a few minutes to fact check myself on this, it looks like this may well be a case of chasing for higher numbers of surround channels - now up to 9.2, or more?- has shifted the goal posts a bit, and that the digits
XO and bi-amp feature may have been a fleeting offering. If so, my apologies for cloudying the waters. If the goal is to achieve proper Low and High pass filtering for active bi-amping, several approaches have already been advanced.
And, IINM, the Dayton is rated T 2@75w into 4ohms, and 150 into 8 when bridged - which is how I run mine.
Last edited:
Hmm, too late.. Found a Yamaha rx-v795 that sounded like an updated version of my rx-v870 for a reasonable price so i bought it. Similar vintage, 5 or 10 yrs newer, 5.1 surround, 85 wpc @ 8 ohms rms.
External amp inputs and preamp outputs.
Ive never found mine to be lacking in wattage, it drives my large & inefficient 3way floor speakers to near painful levels if desired. But, have never measured the output with the appropriate meter either. The cheapo HT in a box system in the garage on the other hand, says 300 watts on the front and full volume( before distortion becomes unbearable) is pitifully low. And its class D.
External amp inputs and preamp outputs.
Ive never found mine to be lacking in wattage, it drives my large & inefficient 3way floor speakers to near painful levels if desired. But, have never measured the output with the appropriate meter either. The cheapo HT in a box system in the garage on the other hand, says 300 watts on the front and full volume( before distortion becomes unbearable) is pitifully low. And its class D.
That looks ideal. BTW you my find it useful to register here if you haven't already Yamaha RX-V795 - Manual - Audio Video Receiver - HiFi Engine
Chris - just saw your post. I don't particularly want more knobs/lights to fiddle with, but the active crossover does allow some flexibility so that i can try out any crossover freq, plus adjust levels so my woofer/full ranges don't have to be perfectly matched in sensitivity. Pllxo would be simpler, true, and cleaner, but I think the cheap active does make the most sense at this point so i can't mess it up. 
A newer combined unit would be nice, but still out of budget. Agreed the features are sweet, I should have looked harder for something modern secondhand, but was thrilled to find a "matching" yamaha receiver today. Its still a good idea, I will dig into this idea a little more and see whats out there!
Not trying for 9.2 surround, but it did cross my mind.
My main speakers will be 8 ohm, so that Dayton w ould only push 30 or 40 watts... it would be a better option if you ran it @4 ohms stereo or 8 bridged as you are.
Thanks!
And thanks Scott definitely need the manual.
A newer combined unit would be nice, but still out of budget. Agreed the features are sweet, I should have looked harder for something modern secondhand, but was thrilled to find a "matching" yamaha receiver today. Its still a good idea, I will dig into this idea a little more and see whats out there!
Not trying for 9.2 surround, but it did cross my mind.
My main speakers will be 8 ohm, so that Dayton w ould only push 30 or 40 watts... it would be a better option if you ran it @4 ohms stereo or 8 bridged as you are.
Thanks!
And thanks Scott definitely need the manual.
Hmm... The rx-v795 has A + B main L/R outputs (as does my current rx-v870, but they don't want you run 8 ohm loads on both A and B simultaneously) that can actually be run at the same time at 8 ohms - or so it appears. So, I may be able to bi-amp with just one receiver...
Does this mean that A & B are actually separate channels, with separate amps? Or just that it's okay running 8 ohms effectively in parallel on A + B for an apparent load of 4 ohms per channel? If it's the latter, wouldn't that bump up the output from the rated 85wpc while also bringing total THD up?
For that matter, does going to a lower impedance load, like switching from 8 ohm speakers to 4 ohm speakers, change the peak wattage output as well, or does it remain the same? (and you just have less headroom from rms to peak?)
See impedance switch on upper right:
Edit:
Nevermind, I just realized that the outputs are tied together from one input regardless, so that will not work. I'd need separate A & B inputs as well, and there are not any. Whoops!
Does this mean that A & B are actually separate channels, with separate amps? Or just that it's okay running 8 ohms effectively in parallel on A + B for an apparent load of 4 ohms per channel? If it's the latter, wouldn't that bump up the output from the rated 85wpc while also bringing total THD up?
For that matter, does going to a lower impedance load, like switching from 8 ohm speakers to 4 ohm speakers, change the peak wattage output as well, or does it remain the same? (and you just have less headroom from rms to peak?)
See impedance switch on upper right:
Edit:
Nevermind, I just realized that the outputs are tied together from one input regardless, so that will not work. I'd need separate A & B inputs as well, and there are not any. Whoops!
Last edited:
Nearly, the A & B are switched speaker terminals from one amp. The schematic is available from the site I linked to (I think)
When you have as many as 9 assignable channels of amplification rated at over 100W in a single chassis that doesn't weigh 200lbs - my Onkyo TX-NR818 clocks in at 40lbs - something's gotta give . Remember those monstrous stereo and quadraphonic receivers of the 70 and 80 horsepower wars? Many were well over 50lbs - but of course the real monsters were units like the 500 power amp 83lbs - and others no doubt even more ridiculous. "Sir, if you think you can afford this amp, surely the chiropractic charges will be petty cash"
Then again, given that the more channels of speakers you're running in the same room, unless they have stupidly low sensitivity, you may still get enough power to your ears to satisfy
Then again, given that the more channels of speakers you're running in the same room, unless they have stupidly low sensitivity, you may still get enough power to your ears to satisfy
A + B is just 2 sets of speakers being connected in parallel to 1 amp/channel. The warning means that they are shy to specify the amp to drive a 4Ω load (not enuff current capability from the power supply, related to the weight thing Chris mentioned). I talked with Don @ Sound Hounds about this and he said that the typical HT receiver does not usually have an issue with the low impedance but will not put out as much power as expected and the protection circuits may kick in earlier. Only an issue when you push the amp towards its limit.
dave
6 inputs? But it only has 5 amplifiers in it. You’d think if it had a change as significant as that it would have a different model number (oops, i see that it does).
dave
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
It does have “decoder” inputs (woofer input likely goes thru bass management but no amp associated with it). One would have to dig up the manual & read how it actually works, but i’d think it is much like a tape input which means at least part of the preamp is still in circuit, but the volume control is not. As long as the XO has gain controls this would be useful.
dave
Not an expert myself, but have played with / set up at least 5 different Marantz, Yamaha, Onkyo and Denon surround receivers within the last 2 years, and they can be more fun than a barrel of monkeys to set up the first time.
Which has got me thinking that navigating through the menus to the operating input / amp assignment levels (often can only be done on-screen) on the two units to achieve the desired results would be more trouble than it's worth, and easily confounded by accidentally pressing the wrong button on either unit's front panel or remote. After assessing which of the two multi-channel receivers is more user friendly, or has some performance advantages, it might make more sense to trade /sell the other in for a basic 2 channel power amp. Of course that means you're back to needing some type of crossover - Choices abound here, but just make sure you've got level control for matching somewhere along the line.
Which has got me thinking that navigating through the menus to the operating input / amp assignment levels (often can only be done on-screen) on the two units to achieve the desired results would be more trouble than it's worth, and easily confounded by accidentally pressing the wrong button on either unit's front panel or remote. After assessing which of the two multi-channel receivers is more user friendly, or has some performance advantages, it might make more sense to trade /sell the other in for a basic 2 channel power amp. Of course that means you're back to needing some type of crossover - Choices abound here, but just make sure you've got level control for matching somewhere along the line.
Last edited:
Yup, I think you guys understand what I'm trying to do. It will be two Yamaha receivers stacked on top of one another, but to my eye it looks better than a lot of smaller chinese made boxes or a diy board in a cheap enclosure (note that one could make very nice wood enclosure though for a diy board... I'm just short on time or I think I would). Even the orange backlights on the displays will match
Together they'll weigh about 60 lbs, these suckers aren't lightweights.
I agree it's not the necessarily the best answer to adding bi-amping to my setup, but it will be tremendously flexible, the price is right, and plenty of nice clean class AB watts.
I'm not sure on the bass management either, have not had time to dig into it yet. Worst case, I could just use the subwoofer output on the CX2310 active EQ - which would be from the front LR channels. Not sure how different that would be versus using the sub output off the new receiver.. Old receiver I seem to recall that being exactly what it did internally, use the bass from the front L/R channels. I'm not sure that the bass to the mains in reduced any though in this case.. I don't think so, seems that it's just duplicated on that line level output (from the receiver). For music, the difference is probably nil anyway; for HT though, I'm not sure which way would be better... possibly decoded bass that was meant for the rears or center would never make it to the subwoofer if I only use the active EQ sub output. I'll be able to try it lots of ways at least...
And yes, that CX2310 does have gain controls, so I should have full control of the sound... for better or worse!
Together they'll weigh about 60 lbs, these suckers aren't lightweights.
I agree it's not the necessarily the best answer to adding bi-amping to my setup, but it will be tremendously flexible, the price is right, and plenty of nice clean class AB watts.
I'm not sure on the bass management either, have not had time to dig into it yet. Worst case, I could just use the subwoofer output on the CX2310 active EQ - which would be from the front LR channels. Not sure how different that would be versus using the sub output off the new receiver.. Old receiver I seem to recall that being exactly what it did internally, use the bass from the front L/R channels. I'm not sure that the bass to the mains in reduced any though in this case.. I don't think so, seems that it's just duplicated on that line level output (from the receiver). For music, the difference is probably nil anyway; for HT though, I'm not sure which way would be better... possibly decoded bass that was meant for the rears or center would never make it to the subwoofer if I only use the active EQ sub output. I'll be able to try it lots of ways at least...
And yes, that CX2310 does have gain controls, so I should have full control of the sound... for better or worse!
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.