1 Large Amp vs. 2 Small Amp Bi-wired.

[disneyjoe7]

I'm sure this has been discussed before, but let's recap ok.

Is it better to Bi-amp with say 200 watt amps by 4 for 2 channel music or 400 watt amp by 2? We will be talking the same amp family not 4 channel of “X” to 2 channel “Y”.

[ohskigod]

i find more power going to the whole speaker works better in my experience, but your going to get varying answers on this question. if you have the ability to try both, do it. if not, i would go with the fewer high power amps then with more less power amps.

[disneyjoe7]

ohskigod,

I see that you bridge your amps is that better then 1 large amp?

Ok a new can of worms ;)

[Vr3MxStyler2k3]

You need to keep the amp powering the tweeter from producing a full 20-20 signal. PE sells passive crossover connectors for this... this lets the amp concentrate on just the high end signal and free up power to bring the most out of the top end....

I prefer biamping

[ohskigod]

Originally posted by disneyjoe7
ohskigod,

I see that you bridge your amps is that better then 1 large amp?

Ok a new can of worms ;)



better? i dont know, some would probably tell you to get one large amp. it's probably more subjective than the biamp/more power debate :D

i bridge my amps that way simply to effectivly use what i have. i have collected the amps over time (constant upgradeitus) and this is just the latest form of it. might someday get one large amp, either a rotel or the outlaw to match my new pre pro. but with the theater sounding as good as it does lately, i am in no rush whatsoever to upgrade the amplification.

[disneyjoe7]

Originally posted by ohskigod
better? i dont know, some would probably tell you to get one large amp. it's probably more subjective than the biamp/more power debate :D

i bridge my amps that way simply to effectivly use what i have. i have collected the amps over time (constant upgradeitus) and this is just the latest form of it.

Thanks I have to agree it's best to use what you have.

[Tour2ma]

Steve,
Agree that in your opening example I'd opt for the 2 x 400 option... and bi-wire for good measure...
(BTW... in your 4 x 200 option you are bi-amping, not bi-wiring.)

By most estimates 85% or so of the power demands in reproducing music are in the lower frequencies, so why apply only 200 wpc to that area when you can use 0.85 x 400 = 340 wpc???

As for bridged vs. mono-blocks? I'd give a slight edge to mono-blocks... Not really based on anything other than bridged mode is secondary application.

Haven't visited Sid's thought on passive filters between Pre-amps and amps in a bi-amp mode in a long while. I do remember an old discussion about when there are already cross-overs in play in your speakers, it's problematic (but if you picked one for the HF duty that crossed over significantly lower than your built in.. hummmm... :confused: ).

[disneyjoe7]

Tour2ma,

BTW what is that "Tour to Massachusetts"?

I on the fence right now doing either A, B, or C?


A.) buy a Parasound HCA-2200 for $600 now adding another later for Bridging or Bi-Amping. I have to see what sounds better. :)

B.) wait save a little more for a HCA-3500 for $1500? In this case just Bi-Wire the speakers.

C.) Do nothing. Wait that may just kill me.

Sorry for any confusing before Bi-Wiring I meant Bi-Amping.

Powering the mighty great sounding RTi150's IMHO, take that for what it's worth.

[Tour2ma]

Took me a minute, but I got it... MA = Mass...
But since it's lower case, Tour 2 milliampere is more likely....

A.) ain't bad, especially if...

D.) use your current amp for the highs and the 2200 for the lows...

[disneyjoe7]

[QUOTE]Took me a minute, but I got it... MA = Mass...
But since it's lower case, Tour 2 milliampere is more likely....

Come on dud, I sure you run on more then milliamps :)

[QUOTE]
A.) ain't bad, especially if...

If ?

[QUOTE]
D.) use your current amp for the highs and the 2200 for the lows...

My current amp will be to power my Atrium55 on the porch / new pool area.

[Tour2ma]

A.) ain't bad if D.) is an option...

[Dennis Gardner]

400 wpc will give 3 db more headroom for any single frequency to use than 200 wpc biamping since only 200 watts exists for the single frequency.

When that huge bass note or explosion hits, 400 watts can go to it instead of 200, thus for sheer overhead the larger amp gives more room on any single given frequency.

When a chord that extends from low to high such as a symphony would give you, the 2-200 watt amps will deliver the same amount of output power since the frequencies are spread out and then the 2 amps may be able to deliver the sound cleaner.
Highs with their own amps need not be affected by the amp trying to overcome bass damping needs on the same amp.

Does that make any sense?

DG

[disneyjoe7]

Option A.)

Wouldn't work alone right now? I use a HK PA2000 100x2 bridged 4x35watt wonder. With my Onkyo 898 110wX7 (nice?) AVR for the tweeters. So if this added up to 210w total then why wouldn't 250w improve the sound.

I thinking 250w x 2 right now then adding another for 250w x 2 to Bridge them to 750w x 1 each. for the sum of $1200 vs the 3500 for 350w x 2 for $1500.

It sounds to me I'm not on the right track.

[disneyjoe7]

Originally posted by Dennis Gardner
400 wpc will give 3 db more headroom for any single frequency to use than 200 wpc biamping since only 200 watts exists for the single frequency.

When that huge bass note or explosion hits, 400 watts can go to it instead of 200, thus for sheer overhead the larger amp gives more room on any single given frequency.

When a chord that extends from low to high such as a symphony would give you, the 2-200 watt amps will deliver the same amount of output power since the frequencies are spread out and then the 2 amps may be able to deliver the sound cleaner.
Highs with their own amps need not be affected by the amp trying to overcome bass damping needs on the same amp.

Does that make any sense?

DG


Clear as MUD, no just kidding :D

Beautiful statement.