• The move to the new server is done. There are some software and database maintenance updates in process. This has us passing the hat around to help out. We appreciate any donations. Seriously, even a dollar helps. The payment page may be found here - https://www.audiokarma.org/support.html

Bi-amping using rear surround amp outs

E

evoltap

New Member
Hi folks, couldn’t find this question answered on here. So I just got a Denon AVR-2808CI (7.1) receiver and I have a 5.1 setup with some Infinity IL 40’s as the fronts. This is also my music listening system, and I really like these speakers. The il40’s have bi-amp capability, and the denon has the ability to assign the rear surround amp to bi-amp the fronts, as described in this article: https://www.crutchfield.com/S-7qjdrsmu3f4/learn/why-biamp-your-speakers.html

My question is, is this worth it? If so what will be the benefits? The denon is rated at 110wpc and the infinity’s can take 175.
 
Register to hide this ad
The article you've linked to tells you pretty much everything you need to know. Passive bi-amping doesn't provide any direct sound quality improvement, because the internal crossover inside the speaker still is operating, and that's arguably a significant drag on the sound quality.

But passive bi-amping will get you more power (because you're driving each speaker with 2X the power from your receiver) - and that could produce noticeable improvements, particularly in the impact, tightness, and control of the bass frequencies.
 
Hey brother! I came here to look for answers on our discussion, and bam, there you are!

That article says that you increase the current by adding another amplifier channel to the front speakers by bi amping. I was always under the impression that you couldn't add more current within the same multi channel amplifier, unless it was a dual power amp, or something like that. I could be totally wrong, but I thought this was would be like bi amping with one 2 channel amp by using channel A and B, which in my understanding is basically just bi wiring.
My understanding of HT amps is limited so I would love to be proven wrong and maybe learn something.
 
Last edited:
tmtomh said:
The article you've linked to tells you pretty much everything you need to know. Passive bi-amping doesn't provide any direct sound quality improvement, because the internal crossover inside the speaker still is operating, and that's arguably a significant drag on the sound quality.

But passive bi-amping will get you more power (because you're driving each speaker with 2X the power from your receiver) - and that could produce noticeable improvements, particularly in the impact, tightness, and control of the bass frequencies.
Click to expand...

Ok so you’re saying the crossover is the bottleneck in terms of quality, but the potential increase in power could have some benefit?
 
WillVT said:
Hey brother! I came here to look for answers on our discussion, and bam, there you are!

That article says that you increase the current by adding another amplifier channel to the front speakers by bi amping. I was always under the impression that you couldn't add more current within the same multi channel amplifier, unless it was a dual power amp, or something like that. I could be totally wrong, but I thought this was would be like bi amping with one 2 channel amp by using channel A and B, which in my understanding is basically just bi wiring.
My understanding of HT amps is limited to I would love to be proven wrong and maybe learn something.
Click to expand...

Ha! Yeah I hope others here can clear this up. I know with the a/b setup (which this amp also has), it is the same amp and changes the ohms if you run both at the same time. I’m pretty sure that in a HT amp they are discrete amps all putting out their own 8ohms and 110wpc in this case, hence the power benefit this article claims. Anybody know this for sure?
 
Certainly doesn't hurt to try it if you are not using the channels for other means.

There may even be some change or even benefit, but the power of both channels is not additive let alone doubling. Does not work that way.

Your speaker still sees effectively the same power as just the single wiring. You do not need to fear damage from too much power any more (or less) than you had to with just the single/non-biamp wiring.
 
evoltap said:
Ok so you’re saying the crossover is the bottleneck in terms of quality, but the potential increase in power could have some benefit?
Click to expand...

Exactly! If you've got an extra pair of decent speaker wires around, certainly no harm in trying it out to see if you can hear an improvement.
 
whoaru99 said:
Certainly doesn't hurt to try it if you are not using the channels for other means.

There may even be some change or even benefit, but the power of both channels is not additive let alone doubling. Does not work that way.

Your speaker still sees effectively the same power as just the single wiring. You do not need to fear damage from too much power any more (or less) than you had to with just the single/non-biamp wiring.
Click to expand...

Ok thanks. So if the Infinity’s have the ability to be bi-amped with two sets of posts, but still go through the crossover, and the Denon manual has a configuration for this exact scenario in the manual, is there some proven benefit that made the manufacturers include this possibility? Or is it just marketing wank/placebo inducer?

As a recording engineer, I like to do A/B tests where I can switch quickly between two options and be blind on what’s what....not gonna happen with this scenario, so I’d rather just know if there’s a consensus that it’s better.
 
I Use the Bi-Amp feature all the time to listen in Extended Stereo ( not expanded )
.. ( not wide ) just turns the back into Stereo like the fronts .... equal Power...
It's just a simple few button pushes on the remote ..... love this feature..
On my Pioneer Elite
 
evoltap said:
Ok thanks. So if the Infinity’s have the ability to be bi-amped with two sets of posts, but still go through the crossover, and the Denon manual has a configuration for this exact scenario in the manual, is there some proven benefit that made the manufacturers include this possibility? Or is it just marketing wank/placebo inducer?

As a recording engineer, I like to do A/B tests where I can switch quickly between two options and be blind on what’s what....not gonna happen with this scenario, so I’d rather just know if there’s a consensus that it’s better.
Click to expand...

Like many things audio, people report results on various levels from a big deal to didn't really notice any difference. For me the results have been in the latter camp with the couple different speakers and amps I've used. YMMV.
 
I had an Onkyo TX-NR1000 a beast of an Uber receiver that ran at 150wpc but had the option to run in BTL mode which used the surround back channels and merged them to the front channels creating roughly 280wpc according to the spec sheet . When I did this I did notice a significant increase in headroom and my speakers were more dynamic when driven at much lower listening volumes. Keep in mind this receiver had the transformer and caps to handle these loads weighing in at 73lbs and I think that’s a big factor when utilizing this feature.

Audiofreak71
 
Hmmm, that's pretty interesting. But just for the OP, being able to bridge the channels (BTL mode) is not in any way like biamping.

I can think of a way where running bridged might be possible on surround receivers without a BTL mode but I wouldn't want to be responsible for accidents in case it didn't work out or got screwed up some how. I should buy an inexpensive/used surround receiver to try that some time. :naughty:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom