Rear speakers vs Biamping
[B]I have a 5 channel amp and is currently using the front channel and subwoofer channel only. My fronts are MB Quarts PCE 216. I want to use the rear channels of the amp but I'm not sure which would be more efficient in giving me a better sound quality. I'm thinking of either using the rear channels for biamping the fronts or installing rear speakers possibly MB quarts RCE 213. Can anybody help? Thanks.
Does the crossover for the fronts have dual inputs to allow biamping?
If not, do you know the frequency specs of the MB Quarts crossover so you can replicate that with the amp's crossovers? If not and you guess wrong, you could easily blow your tweeters if you go too low on the crossover point.
The folks who installed my amp would only set up biamping if my crossover was wired for it like some high end speakers are. The crossover on my speakers wasn't so I had to settle for bridging the extra channels and sending it all to the crossover instead.
Just my $0.02 worth.
If not, do you know the frequency specs of the MB Quarts crossover so you can replicate that with the amp's crossovers? If not and you guess wrong, you could easily blow your tweeters if you go too low on the crossover point.
The folks who installed my amp would only set up biamping if my crossover was wired for it like some high end speakers are. The crossover on my speakers wasn't so I had to settle for bridging the extra channels and sending it all to the crossover instead.
Just my $0.02 worth.
[QUOTE=AlanL,Dec 4 2005, 06:59 AM]Does the crossover for the fronts have dual inputs to allow biamping?
If not, do you know the frequency specs of the MB Quarts crossover so you can replicate that with the amp's crossovers?
If not, do you know the frequency specs of the MB Quarts crossover so you can replicate that with the amp's crossovers?
Personally I don't think bi-amping will do much to improve the sound in an S2000 environment, particularly since you have a sub and the front speakers aren't full-range. If you're still using the passive cross-over and just powering each driver from a separate amp I don't see the point at all.
What do you gain by bi-amping? I can see the benefit if you'r driving a full-range woofer because by eliminating the cross-over your damping factor goes way up, providing better control over the woofer. But with a separate sub to hand the low frequencies I don't think it's worth it.
If you just want to go bi-amp for the added power, the gain would be minimal. Since 90% of the power is going to the woofer anyway, adding an additional 10% is negligible. And having 10 times more power available than you'll ever use for the tweeter doesn't do anything for you either.
For me, adding additional drivers will make better use of the unused amps. You could gain 6dB in sound level by putting similar drivers on the rear channels, compared to a fraction of a dB by going bi-amped. That's like quadrupling the power of your present system.
Or, can you bridge the rear amps with the fronts and use the extra power on the drivers you now have?
.
What do you gain by bi-amping? I can see the benefit if you'r driving a full-range woofer because by eliminating the cross-over your damping factor goes way up, providing better control over the woofer. But with a separate sub to hand the low frequencies I don't think it's worth it.
If you just want to go bi-amp for the added power, the gain would be minimal. Since 90% of the power is going to the woofer anyway, adding an additional 10% is negligible. And having 10 times more power available than you'll ever use for the tweeter doesn't do anything for you either.
For me, adding additional drivers will make better use of the unused amps. You could gain 6dB in sound level by putting similar drivers on the rear channels, compared to a fraction of a dB by going bi-amped. That's like quadrupling the power of your present system.
Or, can you bridge the rear amps with the fronts and use the extra power on the drivers you now have?
.
Originally Posted by modifry,Dec 4 2005, 11:32 AM
If you just want to go bi-amp for the added power, the gain would be minimal. Since 90% of the power is going to the woofer anyway, adding an additional 10% is negligible.
.....
Or, can you bridge the rear amps with the fronts and use the extra power on the drivers you now have?
.....
Or, can you bridge the rear amps with the fronts and use the extra power on the drivers you now have?
Trending Topics
Originally Posted by modifry,Dec 4 2005, 11:32 AM
Or, can you bridge the rear amps with the fronts and use the extra power on the drivers you now have?
.
I can bridge the front channels and rear channels, but doesn't that change the THD ratings for the bridged channels involved. I'll probably just try that over the weekend and see how it goes.
I guess now the issue is which is better in using the rear channels, bridging the F and R channels or installing rear speakers?
Originally Posted by modifry,Dec 4 2005, 11:32 AM
If you're still using the passive cross-over and just powering each driver from a separate amp I don't see the point at all.
Bridging would be more beneficial -- it raises the maximum peak to peak voltage. You'll want to check to see if your amp supports bridging. A lot of car audio gear already uses a bridged setup for the individual outputs, to achieve 50 Watt output without having to use a voltage converter.
If you can bridge channels in the amp -- look at the power ratings for the 5 channels. If they're all the same, bridge two channels for the sub if you can. If the sub channel's rating is higher, then it is probably already bridged. Bridge the front/rear channels, and you should end up with two channels with the same power as the sub channel. Definitely double check in the manual before bridging -- it can be really bad for the amp if you try to bridge channels that are already bridged!




