Bi-Amp/Wire Polk Monitor 50?

cowboydude99

Hi,
My receiver has the option to 'bi-amp' the front speakers. I'm using Polk Monitor 50 for fronts.

Is this a recommended setup? Receiver is a Pioneer SC-1523-K. It is a 9.2 channel receiver. I'm only using 5.1 right now.

Bi-Amp or not? What do you think?

F1nut

Do a search here, been covered.....waste of time.....can't bi-amp with an AVR.

cowboydude99

I used the search function at the top of this forum. No results when I searched 'bi-amp' and 'bi-wire'.

So what is the purpose of the 'bi-amp' option in the receiver? Will it not supply more power over two wires, as it would for 1 wire?

rooftop59

cowboydude99 wrote: »

I used the search function at the top of this forum. No results when I searched 'bi-amp' and 'bi-wire'.

So what is the purpose of the 'bi-amp' option in the receiver? Will it not supply more power over two wires, as it would for 1 wire?

The search function does suck. You have to dig a little more and do an advanced search.

As for the second part, in short to sell more receivers, just like the "bi-amping' capability on your speakers is to make them seem higher end than they are in an effort to sell more speakers. Now they are perfectly fine speakers, but not nearly power-hungry enough to warrant bi-amping. but I won't make fun of you; I tried it on my monitor 30s years ago when I was first getting into audio using the a and b channels on my Denon. I went out and bought some cheap cable from home depot and it didn't make any difference. Why? Because there is one power supply in that avr. When you add more speakers the power going to each speaker drops. A 100 wpc entry level receiver puts out about 30-40 watts into 5 channels. So when you bi-amp its like running 4 channels. the power sent to each speaker was cut in half, rendering the advantage null and void. Your receiver is better, but the math still ends up the same. If you want your speakers to sound better with more power, get an external amp. But honesty those speakers on that avr I don't think you will get much better sound unless you upgrade your speakers. SO if you're happy with what you have leave it alone. If not then I would look at upgrading speakers.

Good luck!

cowboydude99

rooftop59 wrote: »

The search function does suck. You have to dig a little more and do an advanced search.

As for the second part, in short to sell more receivers, just like the "bi-amping' capability on your speakers is to make them seem higher end than they are in an effort to sell more speakers. Now they are perfectly fine speakers, but not nearly power-hungry enough to warrant bi-amping. but I won't make fun of you; I tried it on my monitor 30s years ago when I was first getting into audio using the a and b channels on my Denon. I went out and bought some cheap cable from home depot and it didn't make any difference. Why? Because there is one power supply in that avr. When you add more speakers the power going to each speaker drops. A 100 wpc entry level receiver puts out about 30-40 watts into 5 channels. So when you bi-amp its like running 4 channels. the power sent to each speaker was cut in half, rendering the advantage null and void. Your receiver is better, but the math still ends up the same. If you want your speakers to sound better with more power, get an external amp. But honesty those speakers on that avr I don't think you will get much better sound unless you upgrade your speakers. SO if you're happy with what you have leave it alone. If not then I would look at upgrading speakers.

Good luck!

Thanks for the input. That makes sense. I always thought if the receiver could do 135wpc, that was the MAX per channel, so if I used 2 channels to power 1 speaker, then it would be like 270 max.

I see now.

rooftop59

Yes that is more marketing BS, and that is what they want us to think. 135 wpc, and then they list that number times 5 or 7 as the overall output of the receiver. So of course you should think that bi-amping would double the wattage, but if you look closer at the power ratings its usually one channel driven. So yes, all marketing BS unfortunately...

felipe

speaking of bi-amping monitor 50s, I just upgraded my music setup to the series 2 50s from having the tsi100s. They are hooked up to a 2ch yammy stereo receiver. Would there be any benefit using both the A\B speaker terminals to "bi amp" the monitor 50s? Would that be considered "bi amping"?

jeremymarcinko

No and no. See above, its the same situation.

felipe

Oh I see. Would it be better to just swap out the jumpers for some of my speaker wire? Its copper.

leftwinger57

I fell into the same trap w/ my Yamaha RX-V665 rated for 90w per. Now to me 90 watts was a decent amount until I tried to air it out as I like to say. The avr clipped and went into protection mode and thankfully came back. After asking and knowing I had pre-outs I got my Adcom 555 and used that and that made all the difference. I called Klipsch thinking it was their smalls and they just laughed and said those smalls could handle a true 90 watts and it was the Yamaha and their bloated rating.