What's the benefit of running single amps per channel?

[edison_GTI 10+ year member]

As the title states, what's the benefit of using 2 amps to power each channel of a set of 2-way components?

How do you do it?

Would it be better than running 2-way active?

For example, I have 1 amp (75x2) for the tweeters and 1 amp (100x2) for the mids. I can take my two 100x2 amps and run the components with the passive crossover, one amp per channel. What would be the main difference here?

Click to read more...

 

[FoxPro5 5,000+ posts]

In that vertical biamping situation, I would think you would gain a lot more flexibility if you dropped the passives and ran the tweets on one amp and the mids on the other. Set that 8455 free!!

http://www.audioasylum.com/audio/general/messages/57210.html

 

[edison_GTI 10+ year member]

That's actually what I'm doing at the moment (horizontal biamping), and the reason why I picked the CD8455 (no passives, 3-way active using the HU).

I guess one of the main benefits would be power, since the 100x2 bridged would give 400x1. That would be too much for each channel.

 

[FoxPro5 5,000+ posts]

That's actually what I'm doing at the moment, and the reason why I picked the CD8455 (no passives, 3-way active using the HU).
I guess one of the main benefits would be power, since the 100x2 bridged would give 400x1. That would be too much for each channel.

Oh, sorry I didn't understand your question.....and I still don't actually //content.invisioncic.com/y282845/emoticons/confused.gif.e820e0216602db4765798ac39d28caa9.gif But, more power is better IMHO...even 400 watts.

 

[edison_GTI 10+ year member]

I guess this answers my question, since I was thining on bridging the amps:

When an amp's current load has been doubled due to bridging, it can often fail to provide the required amount of current into the load. Sonic effects include harshness in the midrange and highs, and thin bass. In almost all situations therefore, biamping with similar amps will result in better sound quality than bridging.

Thanks for the link FoxPro5.

 

[thylantyr 10+ year member]

I guess this answers my question, since I was thining on bridging the amps:
When an amp's current load has been doubled due to bridging, it can often fail to provide the required amount of current into the load. Sonic effects include harshness in the midrange and highs, and thin bass. In almost all situations therefore, biamping with similar amps will result in better sound quality than bridging.

Thanks for the link FoxPro5.

A panic statement above.

Amplfier's have power ratings in stereo and bridged mode and typically

in bridge mode it's not the theoretical 4x power, rather 2x of what you

get in stereo mode. Also, clipping headroom doubles in bridge.

If you want to move up the audio food chain on system complexity,

do an amplifier channel per driver and use the active crossover only

and EQ later if needed.

You can begin with two stereo amps. one for tweeters, one for mids.

Later, get two more amps, bridge them all.

one amp bridged for left tweeter(s)

one amp bridged for left midrange(s)

one amp bridged for right tweeter(s)

one amp bridged for right midrange(s)

(s) = you can use more than one driver to make your system even more complex

to get more punishment.

This is esoteric but it's my favorite recipe, bridged amps per driver.