bi amping question

I have a pair of RTI-A1polks I have a adcom amp gfa-555 2x200 watts and a nad c272 amp 2x150 watts I know the polks are rated for 150 watts per , if I use these amps to bi amp the speakers will they handle it ? not to extreme volumes but listening volumes these are very clean sounding amps and you should be able to send more clean power to speakers than rated ? correct? as long as not cranked up to max will they be ok ?
crank it till your ears bleed

Comments

  • pitdogg2
    pitdogg2 Posts: 24,471
    Oh good grief its one driver and a tweeter. Why do you think you need one amp per driver?
    More "clean power" yet not to "extreme volumes" do you really think a pair of tweeters need 90-150 watts each?

    I smell roasted tweeters and resistors in your future.

  • DaveHo
    DaveHo Posts: 3,471
    In addition to biamping being pointless with those speakers, what you are proposing simply won't work. The two amps will have different input sensitivities. One driver will be playing louder than the other throwing the balance off.
  • ZLTFUL
    ZLTFUL Posts: 5,640
    edited October 2020
    he58jav5z0rt.gif
    "Some people find it easier to be conceited rather than correct."

    "Unwad those panties and have a good time man. We're all here to help each other, no matter how it might appear." DSkip
  • invalid
    invalid Posts: 1,270
    It takes a lot of knowledge and money to properly bi-amp, I've been studying this for a few years, so I can bi-amp my apogee duetta 2 speakers. The two comments above are correct, you will definitely ruin the sound you have now. It makes no sense with the speakers you have.
  • kquail
    kquail Posts: 35
    only reason i was asking is watched youtube video and they said it would open the sound stage tremendously but they were using amps slightly lower in power so i will stick with just my adcom gfa-555 running these in regular wiring configure sounds great now but i thought i would ask not sure about bi amping so it never hurts to ask questions
    crank it till your ears bleed
  • pitdogg2
    pitdogg2 Posts: 24,471
    edited October 2020
    Not everything on YT is a good idea.
    Even if you use two amps it's all still going through the same crossover. To do bi-amping correctly you really need an active external crossover.
  • invalid
    invalid Posts: 1,270
    kquail wrote: »
    only reason i was asking is watched youtube video and they said it would open the sound stage tremendously but they were using amps slightly lower in power so i will stick with just my adcom gfa-555 running these in regular wiring configure sounds great now but i thought i would ask not sure about bi amping so it never hurts to ask questions

    I don't think those speakers warrant a bi-amp configuration. If you had speakers that did you would need a line level crossover that splits the signal right after the preamp, then you bypass the crossover in the speaker, and the line level crossover can also gain match the amps.
  • soundfreak1
    soundfreak1 Posts: 3,374
    Biamping without external crossover is mental masterbation.
    Main Rig:
    Krell KAV 250a biamped to mid/highs
    Parasound HCA1500A biamped to lows
    Nakamichi EC100 Active xover
    MIT exp 1 ic's
    Perreaux SA33 class A preamp
    AQ kingcobra ic's
    OPPO 83 CDP
    Lehmann audio black cube SE phono pre, Audioquest phono wire (ITA1/1)
    Denon DP-1200 TT. AToc9ML MC cart.
    Monster HTS 3600 power conditioner
    ADS L1590/2 Biamped
    MIT exps2 speaker cable
  • marvda1
    marvda1 Posts: 4,862
    the best way to bi-amp without the headache is to have two identical amps.
    Amplifiers: Norma IPA 140, MasterSound Compact 845, Ayre v6xe, Consonance Cyber 800
    Preamp: deHavilland Ultraverve 3
    Dac: Sonnet Morpheus 2, Musical Paradise mp-d2 mkIII
    Transport: Jay's Audio CDT2 mk2, Lumin U1 mini
    Speakers: Rosso Fiorentino Volterra II
    Speaker Cables: Organic Audio Organic Reference 2
    Interconnects: Argento Organic Reference 2, Argento Organic 2
    Power Cables: Argento Organic Reference, Synergistic Research Foundation 10 and 12 ga.
    Puritan PSM156
  • invalid
    invalid Posts: 1,270
    Biamping without external crossover is mental masterbation.

    With two identical amps you can get better channel separation even in a passive bi-amp setup, but of course it would be better to have a line level crossover.
  • soundfreak1
    soundfreak1 Posts: 3,374
    Very seldom have I found one amp that does everything perfect. Some amps do real good bass others mids and highs. As long as the xover has output gain control you can balance any amp or combo of amps.
    Main Rig:
    Krell KAV 250a biamped to mid/highs
    Parasound HCA1500A biamped to lows
    Nakamichi EC100 Active xover
    MIT exp 1 ic's
    Perreaux SA33 class A preamp
    AQ kingcobra ic's
    OPPO 83 CDP
    Lehmann audio black cube SE phono pre, Audioquest phono wire (ITA1/1)
    Denon DP-1200 TT. AToc9ML MC cart.
    Monster HTS 3600 power conditioner
    ADS L1590/2 Biamped
    MIT exps2 speaker cable
  • mhardy6647
    mhardy6647 Posts: 32,922
    Hmm... there is absolutely a case to be made for biamping a two-way loudspeaker (IMO)... but (and this is a big but)* the 'right way' to do it is with an active crossover (either a purpose-built analog electronic crossover, or via DSP) and appropriate & empathetic amplification.

    In the "high sensitivity/compression driver" world, e.g., one might use a big, bodacious solid state amplification for the bass driver, an electronic crossover, and a high quality vacuum tube amplifier as the amplifier for the treble driver.

    __________
    * As opposed to a big but*, if you will, which is a different matter altogether. B)
  • invalid
    invalid Posts: 1,270
    mhardy6647 wrote: »
    Hmm... there is absolutely a case to be made for biamping a two-way loudspeaker (IMO)... but (and this is a big but)* the 'right way' to do it is with an active crossover (either a purpose-built analog electronic crossover, or via DSP) and appropriate & empathetic amplification.

    In the "high sensitivity/compression driver" world, e.g., one might use a big, bodacious solid state amplification for the bass driver, an electronic crossover, and a high quality vacuum tube amplifier as the amplifier for the treble driver.

    __________
    * As opposed to a big but*, if you will, which is a different matter altogether. B)

    The apogee full range came with an active crossover and a passive line level crossover, some prefer the passive to the active. Just something to think about.
  • mhardy6647
    mhardy6647 Posts: 32,922
    In principle, the idea of crossovers that have to dissipate (relatively) high power at the loudspeaker seems pretty foolish. It puts huge demands on the components and wastes amplifier power. In principle, it makes far more sense, to me, to separate, filter,and contour frequency bands at line level and feed those signals to the power amplifier and thence to the loudspeaker(s) that respond to each band.

    That said, I've spent most of my hifi time listenin' to and fiddlin' with loudspeakers with high-level, passive XOs -- probably because that has for so long been the most common way to handle the "problem" in consumer audio.

    I suspect that's probably changing fairly rapidly now, for better or worse, particularly with the rise of powered loudpseaker systems with their own DSP and contouring on board.

  • invalid
    invalid Posts: 1,270
    Mhardy6647 have you ever used a passive line level crossover?
  • joecoulson
    joecoulson Posts: 4,943
    Another thing to consider is that when jumpers are removed from said loudspeaker for bi-amping, there is no guarantee that the impedance will be the same from hi to low connections. Making it a level matching game on top of everything else mentioned above.
  • invalid
    invalid Posts: 1,270
    joecoulson wrote: »
    Another thing to consider is that when jumpers are removed from said loudspeaker for bi-amping, there is no guarantee that the impedance will be the same from hi to low connections. Making it a level matching game on top of everything else mentioned above.

    Don't most line level crossovers take care of that issue?
  • mhardy6647
    mhardy6647 Posts: 32,922
    edited October 2020
    invalid wrote: »
    Mhardy6647 have you ever used a passive line level crossover?

    Sort of :)

    I did some slightly embarrassing experiments with a two way system consisting of (get ready for this...) the LF section of an (unsuffixed) AR-2, an Altec 511B loaded with a modern 1" compression driver (I'd really rather not say which one, since folks might Pyle onto me if I confessed B) ) and a first order XO.

    ssyqgavkj7v7.png

    Appearances to the contrary, this was a biamp application - the HF and LF units were each driven by one channel of that little h/k receiver, and balanced via, umm, the balance control. :relaxed:

    I also once had, for a while, one of these truly odd late 1960s Onkyo receivers with three separate outputs for W, M, and T -- meant to be used with a specific (and, of course, crossoverless) Onkyo loudspeaker. I believe/assume the XOs were passive -- but I don't know that for a fact.

    39371826855_845d8686d6_o.jpgOnkyomultiac602_zps2e7f5a6e by Mark Hardy, on Flickr

    39371826935_a0b4d94460_o.jpgOnkyomultiac604_zps1d10c3af by Mark Hardy, on Flickr
  • invalid
    invalid Posts: 1,270
    Believe it or not, Marchand makes a 4th order passive line level crossover and it's signal to noise ratio is better than their active crossovers. They use high quality potted inductors.