Manual calls it Bi Amping?

Nold

VSX 1021-k with Polk monitor 60's No sub

So I decided to try and Bi wire my new system. I followed the instructions in the manual which call it Bi amping, however, I only have the one amp.
So I ran cables from the top speaker posts to the front L and R outputs on my receiver. Then I ran cables from the bottom speaker posts to the rear L and R outputs on the receiver. This is exactly what the instructions say to do. I also removed the jumper plates on the speakers. My question is , is this Bi Wiring or Bi Ampimg? According to what I read on the forums its Bi Wiring. Also. With the automatic setup using the microphone will it take into account the Bi-wired speakers? How Would I optimize this setup? Thanks guys!

Glowrdr

What you've done is bi-amping. The issue there (that you commented on) is that you only have 1 amp so bi-amping really doesn't work. Well, some people say it does, others say it doesn't. The problem isn't exactly that you only have 1 amp, it's that you only have 1 power supply. So by adding the 2 additional channels, you are just taking power away from the rest. It's a fluid transfer of power that changes based on need - not a reserve waiting to be tapped into.

Bi-wiring is just removing the metal jumper plate on the back of the speaker, and replacing it with some short jumper wires. The same way people go out and purchase good quality speaker wire, they are removing the stock plate and using better quality materials.

The MCACC correction will not account for bi-wiring, because nothing is changing. It can adjust for bi-amping by adjusting the sound levels between the highs and the lows - but again, you are really not bi-amping. You can certianly give it a try for yourself to see if you like it.

Nold

But with only 2 speakers I shouldn't be reaching anywhere near max output of power should I ? Will I hurt my system leaving it this way? Should I just replace the jumpers and leave only the single wires?

Glowrdr

You won't hurt your system no (with the precaution that just about anything can hurt a speaker, just keep it at safe levels)

What your missing is that currently, you are drawing 2 channels of full power as far as the receiver is concerned. You add 2 more speakers, that takes some of the power away from those 2 channels to power the other "2". Make sense? Lets say they rate your stereo at 100 watts per channel. That's 1 channel they are rating. Even though you may have a 5.1 or 7. system, the rating is still for 1 channel. It goes down for each channel you have hooked up.

I would try it both ways and see what you like. If you can't tell a difference, then just run them regularly and forget about the bi-amping. It's a term that is thrown around a lot, when in all reality only a couple percent of people actually are doing it (not a scientific number by any means FYI)

BlueFox

Glowrdr wrote: »

Bi-wiring is just removing the metal jumper plate on the back of the speaker, and replacing it with some short jumper wires.

Actually, that is called 'replacing the jumpers". Bi-wiring is removing the jumpers, and running two sets of speaker wire from the same terminals on the amp to the two sets of speaker terminals. Electrically, it is the same as having one set of speaker wires and jumpers. This gives one the opportunity to spend twice as much on speaker cables.

Nold

So am I getting 100w for both channels then? OR is it like 50/50? I'm still a bit fuzzy on that subject.

62caddy

Nold wrote: »

VSX 1021-k with Polk monitor 60's No sub

So I decided to try and Bi wire my new system. I followed the instructions in the manual which call it Bi amping, however, I only have the one amp.
So I ran cables from the top speaker posts to the front L and R outputs on my receiver. Then I ran cables from the bottom speaker posts to the rear L and R outputs on the receiver. This is exactly what the instructions say to do. I also removed the jumper plates on the speakers. My question is , is this Bi Wiring or Bi Ampimg? According to what I read on the forums its Bi Wiring. Also. With the automatic setup using the microphone will it take into account the Bi-wired speakers? How Would I optimize this setup? Thanks guys!

This topic recently arose on AudioKarma and this is the most thorough and comprehensive statement I have read on the the subject.

http://www.audiokarma.org/forums/showthread.php?p=5344769#post5344769

Glowrdr

BlueFox wrote: »

Actually, that is called 'replacing the jumpers". Bi-wiring is removing the jumpers, and running two sets of speaker wire from the same terminals on the amp to the two sets of speaker terminals. Electrically, it is the same as having one set of speaker wires and jumpers. This gives one the opportunity to spend twice as much on speaker cables.

lol - thanks for the heads up then. It's hard to keep all this stuff straight. Does this mean my already large rats nest will sound better if I add another string of 15 foot wires?

Glowrdr

Nold wrote: »

So am I getting 100w for both channels then? OR is it like 50/50? I'm still a bit fuzzy on that subject.

I can't find the benchmarks for your reciever to give you exacts - but just for the sake of it, let's just say what I am telling you is not accurate - just an example.

If you have a 100w receiver, it isn't exactly 50/50 into 2 channels. It will be more like 70x2, or 45x5. Now there are some receivers that break down alot less (Pio Elite and H/K are 2 that I know of). Nothing against your receiver, but it's definately not in the top of the foodchain when it comes to the benchmarks. There are worse out there, but there are also better. It all depends on the price you are willing to spend.

I've got a receiver with a $2200 MSRP, and there are still better receivers out there. Let alone once you start getting into seperates.

Like I've said though - it definately will not hurt to try it, but don't be suprised when you don't get the results you were expecting. I read that artilce linked above, and it is a very good explanation of bi-amping. That might clear up some stuff too.

jviss

Glowrdr wrote: »

I can't find the benchmarks for your reciever to give you exacts - but just for the sake of it, let's just say what I am telling you is not accurate - just an example.

If you have a 100w receiver, it isn't exactly 50/50 into 2 channels. It will be more like 70x2, or 45x5. Now there are some receivers that break down alot less (Pio Elite and H/K are 2 that I know of). Nothing against your receiver, but it's definately not in the top of the foodchain when it comes to the benchmarks. There are worse out there, but there are also better. It all depends on the price you are willing to spend.

I've got a receiver with a $2200 MSRP, and there are still better receivers out there. Let alone once you start getting into seperates.

Like I've said though - it definately will not hurt to try it, but don't be suprised when you don't get the results you were expecting. I read that artilce linked above, and it is a very good explanation of bi-amping. That might clear up some stuff too.

What the OP has described is bi-wiring. Many, myself included, believe that bi-wiring is so much snake oil. Assuming sufficient copper in the original single set of cables given the power transferred and the length of the cables, the second set of cables will make no difference.

Bi-amping may have some benefits, but that is dependent on the specific characteristics of the system under discussion.