amps

2-tall
2-tall Posts: 98
edited September 2005 in Vintage Speakers
I have 3.1TL's and am driving them with a carver tfm 24 with 250 watts per channel.I have a chance to buy another tfm 24.What would be the best way to hook up the two amps for my speakers and what type of connectors would I need?
Thanks
Post edited by 2-tall on
· Share on FacebookShare on Twitter

Comments

  • ohskigod
    ohskigod Posts: 6,505
    edited September 2005
    Check of your speaker has the pin blade interconnect. if it doea, then common ground is not an issue (I think, wait for the experts to chime in). If you have 2 pairs of binding posts on each speak, then biamping is an option (one amp running the top posts for the tweets, the other amp to the bottom posts for the midbass). That shouldnt be a problem at all since your carvers are common ground, so the pin blade thing wouldnt even be an issue.
    If no common ground is kosher with your 3.1's (and agaoin, wait for the experst), you can run one carver bridged to each channel. If you capable of doing both methods, your going to get arguments either way for which one is best.
    Living Room 2 Channel -
    Wiim Ultra. Jolida CD player. Fiio k11 R2R DAC, XTZ as300 Edge amp. Focal Cobalt 826 towers,

    Upstairs 2 Channel Rig -
    Classe Audio 5 Preamp, DIY1200as2 Icepower Amp x 2, Wiim pro streamer and Topping E70 Velvet DAC, California Audio Labs DX1 CD player, Polk LSi15's with MM840 woofer upgrade.

    Studio Rig - Scarlett 18i20(Gen3) DAW, Schitt Saga 2 preamp, Topping a90 headphone amp, Mac Mini, Audiophonics Hypex NC252m amp, Polk r200's
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • BobMcG
    BobMcG Posts: 1,585
    edited September 2005
    2-tall,
    You don't have to worry about looking at your SDA connections as the 3.1s were never made with blade/blade, only pin/blade. This means you can run the Carvers bridged to mono but you'll have to use (make) an AI-1 cable.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • madmax
    madmax Posts: 12,434
    edited September 2005
    Or, you could do a horizontal bi-amp. One amp L&R bass, the other amp L&R treble. No need to use an active crossover or anything. No AI-1 cable either.
    madmax
    Vinyl, the final frontier...

    Avantgarde horns, 300b tubes, thats the kinda crap I want... :D
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • BobMcG
    BobMcG Posts: 1,585
    edited September 2005
    madmax wrote:
    Or, you could do a horizontal bi-amp. One amp L&R bass, the other amp L&R treble. No need to use an active crossover or anything. No AI-1 cable either.
    madmax


    Right on Max.
    Exactly the way I ran my 2.3s when I first got them.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • 2-tall
    2-tall Posts: 98
    edited September 2005
    Which would be the better way to set this up?I do have the AI-1 cable.Also do you think that I will hear much of a difference?
    Thanks
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • BobMcG
    BobMcG Posts: 1,585
    edited September 2005
    Will there be a giant difference? No. Not with the wattage your using.

    Which way would be better? Look at it this way. SDAs love power. Lots and lots of good clean power. Get the hint?

    You have the means of going either direction so try them both. You decide what's best to you.
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter
  • BMc
    BMc Posts: 35
    edited September 2005
    I also am also using 3.1TL's (with pin/blade connectors and 4 binding posts ea.) for my font L and R channels. I want to power them with two 200-watt Outlaw mono amps connected to the 1070 receiver. Outlaw says the mono amps are common ground. Should I make the AI-1 cable? What would be the best sounding wiring method?
    Sony KF-50WE610 LCD Projection TV
    Dish 411 HD satellite receiver
    Arcam AVR 300 Receiver
    NAD 502 CD Player
    Toshiba DVD SD-3800
    front: Polk 3.1TL w/ RD0198-1 tweeter
    center: Polk CS350-LS
    surrounds: Polk Monitor 7C
    channels 6 + 7 set to biamp front
    · Share on FacebookShare on Twitter