honestguv wrote:
Passive bi-amplification does almost nothing (but not quite nothing)
and would appear to be mainly an old audiophile marketing tool.
I agree, active bi-amplification is better, but actually, passive
bi-amping makes quite a considerable difference.
I used to use it myself
Robin Bowes;291936 Wrote:
honestguv wrote:
Passive bi-amplification does almost nothing (but not quite
nothing)
and would appear to be mainly an old audiophile marketing tool.
I agree, active bi-amplification is better, but actually, passive
bi-amping makes quite a considerable
Someone probably deleted them while cleaning up the server.
Probably shouldn't have gone in a directory called temp in the first
place :)
--
funkstar
funkstar's Profile:
funkstar;291940 Wrote:
Someone probably deleted them while cleaning up the server.
[...]
Well, considering one of Sean's best arguments is, to paraphrase, yes
DACs and other components have subjective and unmeasurable factors to
their sound but of the things that are measurable, the TP DAC
seanadams;291893 Wrote:
That's wrong - below radio frequencies, you want a low source impedance
and a high load impedance. 100R into 10K is a good (and typical)
arrangement for audio.
Obviously, the theorem is not wrong
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maximum_power_theorem
but I'll take your
pfarrell;291888 Wrote:
OK, I'm missing something here.
You remove the jumper on the speaker between the woofer and tweeter,
bypassing the internal crossover in the speaker. Where is the
(passive)
crossover???
Inside the speaker case, naturally.
We're talking about speakers with
wireless200;291953 Wrote:
Obviously, the theorem is not wrong
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maximum_power_theorem
I think Sean was probably referring to the doesn't bode well part of
your post when he said it was wrong. Read the second paragraph of the
wiki article you linked to and you'll
I have four Alecto monoblocks driving my speakers, two per speaker.
Adding the second pair of amps was a significant upgrade in terms of
bass control and depth. It also made an (admittedly lesser) improvement
to the treble, removing a layer of grain.
When using stereo amps, it is normal to use
You are in danger of confusing the OP IMO:
Bi-amping is using a pair of amps to drive a conventional passive
loudspeaker. Using a (line level) crossover before the amplifiers, is
generally known as 'active' and is a quite different approach.
Bi-amping usually works because the passive
ModelCitizen;291744 Wrote:
I'm perplexed why you asked this here. The Naim forums seem the obvious
place to ask.
MC
Actually I cheated, I asked in both forums.
--
agentsmith
System 1: SB2 and a mostly Naim system
System 2: SB2 connected digitally to a Meridian F80
iPhone;291742 Wrote:
All joking aside, at least the wife lets you enjoy your hobby and even
allows the buying of new stuff. Most of us can#8217;t have everything,
so at least having a better half that allows us to enjoy our hobby is
more then half the battle.
After all these years my
Yes, of course - a dual mono design is effectively the same as my set up
using monoblocks.
Another thing about vertical bi-amping is that it does give you the
opportunity to site the amps near the speakers, and run long
interconnects if you so wish.
--
bigfool1956
David Ayers
Music is what
wireless200;292026 Wrote:
TP (100 ohms) into Amp (10k ohms) vs Amp output (~4 ohms) into speakers
(~4 ohms). In one case the impedance is not matched in the other it is.
I assume this is because the speaker is a physical transducer and you'd
need maximum power transfer but again I'd like
Take the highly regarded Brystons as an example. Their pre-amps have an
output impedence of 110 ohms, and their power amps an input impedence
of 50k ohms. 100 ohms or so is pretty much a standard value for
pre-amps, and matches the output of the TP.
Therefore this is a technical non-issue in
I would agree with most of the posts. I have speakers that are designed
to be run in a bewildering variety of consigurations that I won't list
here, simply by changing the orientation of the connection panel on the
back. I run mine active (x-overs are optional plugin modules inside the
stereo
wireless200;292047 Wrote:
The Mcintosh mc402 gives 2, 4, and 8 terminals as output load
impedance.
Yes: that's the required LOAD impedance, ie. the input impedance of the
device you're driving (the speakers). The output impedance of the
amplifier itself (the SOURCE impedance) will be
wireless200;292026 Wrote:
Well I think NewBuyer had it right: you want maximum voltage across the
target but I wanted to hear Sean's explanation.
I want to use the TP as a pre-amp and avoid buying a separate pre-amp.
That's why I'm asking these questions. Although it's good information
opaqueice;292032 Wrote:
Eh? What kind of SS amp has an ouput impedance of 4 ohms? Mostly
they're well under .1 ohms (usually expressed in terms of the damping
factor).
An amplifier with an output impedance close to the impedance of the
speaker it's connected to will audibly distort.
Don't try and compare line level situations with speaker load
situations, as there is more to take into account in the case of
speakers.
In the line level situation, which you asked about initially, the
connection is made using voltage bridging (AKA impedence bridging).
Maximum power transfer is
I'd recommend that you get the amp/speakers you want and hook up the TP
directly to the amp and give it a listen. If you don't like what you
hear, then add a pre-amp. I wouldn't budget for one right out of the
box.
Having said that, I ended up using one because I like the way it
sounds. I'm
Phil Leigh;292052 Wrote:
For me personally I find active is a significant leap in quality from
bi/tri-amping as the passive crossover is gone, gone, gone...and so is
the small waste of electricity that is dumping power for no reason
because of the insertion loss. Active seems to give much
Hey. Nice rugs!
--
gharris999
gharris999's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=115
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=46270
David - power transfer is irrelevant in the context of audio (generally
speaking). It is very important in power stations and radio
transmitters.
Amplifiers and pre-amps have active devices in them - transistors and
valves - that amplify the voltages. Power transfer is only relevant
where we are
Okey-dokey, I better get out two bottles of Vitamin I. My eyes are
crossed. Thank you to opaqueice for providing pictures - even in
color!
I had already found the Rod Elliot article and immediately knew I
needed the Cliff Note version.
Carry-on. I have plenty of friends who will enjoy the
Thanks Phil and others I think I've got a better understanding of what's
going on there.
Actually I understand the Wiki article just fine. I derived the
theorem in 2nd year EE and have an MSEE. It's covered in every
Circuits 101 class. Actually I think opaq is a little confused about
what it
opaqueice;292064 Wrote:
Actually the wikipedia article is fine - he just needed to read (and
understand) past the first two sentences. Maybe that was too much to
expect.
Actually understanding the article - standard fare in any circuits 101
class - isn't the issue. The article doesn't say
Wireless, not sure you need all that power for the Aerials. FWIW, I have
Aerial Model 9s-pretty similar to the 7bs except with more bass. When I
first got them, I powered them with a 150 watt Classe intergrated.
Sounded teriffic. However, I had been told by numerous sources that the
9s would only
wireless200;292136 Wrote:
I think that's where you're getting confused.
Confused about what?
--
opaqueice
opaqueice's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=4234
View this thread:
Shredder;292146 Wrote:
[...]Perhaps relevant to your original question, I run my TP directly
into my power. Without attenuators, my amps had way way too much gain.
Added Endler stepped attenuators and am now happy as a clam.
Good luck.
Shred, why didn't you adjust the jumpers inside the
I've come to understand that less 'rated power' can -in principle-
confer an advantage.
Every active component has a dynamic range and that includes power
amps. This means a lower rated amp -can- have an advantage conferred to
it against a bigger amp whose dynamic range stays mostly unused even
Actually, I -am- confused about Phil's post.
Phil Leigh;292086 Wrote:
As an example, if your power amp can swing 40V from its PSU rails, has
an impedance of 2 ohms and is running into an 8 ohm speaker, the max
voltage the amp could deliver to the speaker would be:
40*(8/8+2) = 32 volts
iPhone;291745 Wrote:
If you can spring for a few more hundred dollars a Duet or SB3 would
sound great with a Bel Canto e.One DAC3 D/A processor. I really enjoy
my Transporter, but if I were going to get a DAC for the Duet or SB3
and could afford a Transporter, I would get the Bel Canto e.One
NoFlyZone;292168 Wrote:
I have a slightly modded SB3 with the Welbourne Power supply. I'm also
thinking of the Transporter but with the Modwright truth mods. I've
been on the fence trying to decide between an outboard DAC such as
Audio Notes 2.1 kit or another high quality DAC. Not being
opaqueice;292163 Wrote:
Actually, I -am- confused about Phil's post.
In your examples you treated the amp as a voltage source and the output
impedance as if it were in -parallel- with the load. But (regardless of
the class) I thought output impedance is defined as the part of the
I always thought that Musical Fidelity does a good job explaining the
benefit of reserve power in their amps - they focus on dynamic range
and performance with musical transients, rather than a sustained db
level performance.
'_Here_is_one_such_explanation_from_them_'
O is correct - when we speak of the impedance of a source, we are
talking about what is effectively a series resistance in the source.
For a power amp driving speakers, you want it as low as possible. See
diagrams here: http://www.kpsec.freeuk.com/imped.htm. Also, highly
recommend reading: The
opaqueice;286439 Wrote:
I had mixed impressions too. I wasn't impressed with the midrange,
although on some recordings it was adequate. As for the bass, I
thought it was too much: I have some recordings of solo bowed acoustic
bass where the bassist suddenly plays a sustained, very low
As to why impedance _matching_ (in the proper sense of the term) of amps
and speakers is usually NOT desirable: basically the reason is that the
efficiency is very poor.
Let's suppose you have a power amplifier with an output Z of 0.1 ohms,
and you want to get maximal power out of it. It might
What's the consensus on Dynaudio around here?
They're making a PC 2.1 system with all speakers individually
powered. About US $2000.
It's minimalistic. Add an outboard DAC if that's too cheap.
p
--
pski
pski's Profile:
bigfool1956;291994 Wrote:
I have four Alecto monoblocks driving my speakers, two per speaker.
Adding the second pair of amps was a significant upgrade in terms of
bass control and depth. It also made an (admittedly lesser) improvement
to the treble, removing a layer of grain.
When using
What a waste.
TD
--
tyler_durden
tyler_durden's Profile: http://forums.slimdevices.com/member.php?userid=2701
View this thread: http://forums.slimdevices.com/showthread.php?t=46270
W.A.F. = 0
If he has one :)
--
swhite58
Clark Connect Linux file server-Various boxes with flashing
lights-SB3-Zhaolu D3 DAC-NAD C320BEE-Polk Monitor 4.5/Sennheiser
headphones
swhite58's Profile:
42 matches
Mail list logo
