my setup- is this biamping or just biwiring

Hi,
Can someone please explain to me how the A and B Speaker outputs normally work?

I have connected the tweeter and mids to the A Speaker outputs; and the woofers to the B Speaker outputs. Is this bi-wiring or bi-amping?

(there are no separate tone controls or anything for the A & B outputs, so they get the same signal, I am just not sure if they are just 2 sets of connectors for the same internal amp, or if it would actually use separate amps)

If you did this with a surround sound amp in stereo mode, this would be bi-amping, right?

Thanks is advance,

Simon

Hi Simon,
It's confusing but I'll try to explain. Each channel has it's own amplifier section. A stereo receiver has 2 channels or 2 amplifier sections (even though it's called "a' amp, no one's calls them stereo amps, although it is the correct term, since the early 60's when stereo first arrived). When you use the A/B speakers, you are still using the same 2 channels or amplifiers. You have the speakers in parallel. If you pressed A+B to play all 4 speakers, it would be the same as if you put all 4 speakers in parallel on the A speaker terminals. No difference. So to use both A+B for one pair of speakers would be Bi-Wiring. (assuming you have to pair of terminals on your speakers, one for LF, or the woofer, the other for HF, or the tweeter).

An AV receiver has 5 channels,(some have 6 or 7) with each with it's own amplifier section. So when you do use the fronts, with the surrounds, under the "stereo all" setting with 2 speakers you are Bi- Amping. (although audio purist would use 2 stereo amplifiers with an electronic crossover, the passive crossover in your speakers disconnected) but it has been done with AV receivers, using the L/R Fronts and L/R surrounds. Some say it makes a difference, some say not.
Here is a quote from the NAD website:
Q: What is Bi-amping?
A: Bi-amping is when two amplifiers are used to drive one speaker. The speaker must have the facility to be bi-amplified; having one set of terminal posts for the mid-range/tweeter speaker(s) and a second set for the bass speaker(s). Bi-amping will give you improved sound.

Keep in mind using a single AV receiver for Bi-Amping, isn't considered "Bi-Amping" by purists (that's where the confusion comes in) since the amplifier sections of a AV receiver share some of the same components (transformer, power supply etc.)

The sub( LFE) , has it's own channel, mono, but has no amplifier, the signal is fed from from the preamp section).

I hope this helps.

luvtolisten, thanks for holding my hand as usual! :D

So would the order of (theoretical) benefit be from least to most be:

1) single wiring
2) bi-wiring using single set of terminal posts
3) bi-wiring using separate posts
4) bi-amping using single surround sound amp
5) bi-amping using multiple separate amps, electronic crossovers, etc etc

Is this right?

Also, when you have an amp (or stereo amp...) with A and B outputs, are these just parallel outputs from the same amp circuit, or do they branch into separate circuits somewhere along the line?

I notice the clicking of relays when switching the A or B speakers on or off, does that mean the circuits are separated somehow?

Thanks,
Simon

http://www.audioholics.com/education...ng-vs-biwiring

follow the link up to "frequently asked questions" for more answers than you could ever think of.

A & B speakers both run off the same amp.

luvtolisten, thanks for holding my hand as usual!

Hey, no problem, we weren't born with this knowledge! My grandfather used to say, there is no such thing as a dumb question, just dumb answers.

So would the order of (theoretical) benefit be from least to most be:

1) single wiring
2) bi-wiring using single set of terminal posts
1&2 are the same, all you're doing is doubling the gauge of the wire.

3) bi-wiring using separate posts
Yes, this is Bi-Wiring (separate posts on each speaker, that is).

4) bi-amping using single surround sound amp
Yes, though some swear Bi-Wiring makes a bigger difference. I think it's up to the individual, whether you'll hear a difference or any at all. Some say it's in your hearing, some say it's in your equipment, some say it's all in your head. What does matter is what you like. Experiment yourself to find the answer most to your liking.

5) bi-amping using multiple separate amps, electronic crossovers, etc etc
Yes, this is considered by some (using high end equipment) the best of the 5 mentioned.

Is this right?
Pretty much.

Also, when you have an amp (or stereo amp...) with A and B outputs, are these just parallel outputs from the same amp circuit, or do they branch into separate circuits somewhere along the line?
Right A, and Right B are from the same circuit, same is true of Left A and Left B. You have a 3 way switch at the output of the each amplifier section, (Right channel and left channel). Position 1 you get Speakers A, Position 2 you get Speaker B, Position 3 you get A+B.

I notice the clicking of relays when switching the A or B speakers on or off, does that mean the circuits are separated somehow?
That clicking sound is a good healthy sound. It means they put in a decent size relay,(to handle more current) to switch between speakers, rather than use a cheapo circuit with transistors, as you would find on a cheaper entry level mass market receiver to save $. If there is no remote, then some will just use a 2 pole 3 position switch on the front panel

Thanks,
Simon
You're welcome!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nomis3613

If you did this with a surround sound amp in stereo mode, this would be bi-amping, right?

---

No, you're just using the front two channels without rewiring the back channels to drive some part of the main speakers. A simple variation of bi-amping is using powered subwoofers. I use small Polk RT35 speakers as the mains in my HT driven by a NAD receiver. The speaker selection is set to "small" and I chose the 200 hz high pass crossover. The powered subs run the bottom three octaves separately and are equalized to deal with room modes.. The nice part is that even if the bass amps clip, the sound from the mains is unaffected. Clipping an amp driving a full range speaker is immediately obvious, while clipping a sub is less so. This approach also provides more headroom to the mains since their workload has been lessened.

rw

If you put your AV receiver, in stereo mode, and use the right front, with the right surround, and the left front with the left surround, you are bi-amping to one pair of speakers using the LF and HF terminals.

Here is a quote from Wikipedia on AV Receiver Amplifiers:

Amplification
Stereo receivers have two channel of amplification, while AV receivers may have more than 2. The standard for AV receivers is five channels of amplification. These are usually referred to as 5.1 receivers. This provides for a left, right, center, left surround and right surround speaker to be powered by the receiver. 7.1 receivers provide for two additional surround channels, left rear surround, and right rear surround. The '.1' refers to the LFE (low frequency effects) channel the signal of which is usually sent to an amplified subwoofer unit. 5.1 and 7.1 receivers don't usually provide amplification for this channel. Instead, they provide a line level output

Since you are using 4 channels, each with their own amplifier section,you are in fact bi-amping, even though you are not doing with 2 outboard units. All the amplifiers are just in the same box, using the passive crossover rather than an electronic one. This has been debated on other forums if it is bi-amping or not, It certainly isn't bi-wiring, but it is close to
bi-amping, although not in the purest sense, but perhaps a "cousin " of it.
An AV amplifier has at least 5 channels with it's own amplifier. Other wise if you just played a 5.1 system in stereo mode, (forget about bi-amping for a minute) with only 2 channels and amplifiers, the impedance of the speakers would be dangerously low. It would be like taking a stereo receiver, hooking up 2 speakers on the right channel and the other 3 on the left. Imagine what would happen if you had a 6.1 or 7.1 system. It would drive the impedance even lower. The receiver's outputs would short out and fry. They have to have their own channel and amplifier. They do however, share the same signal (Right and Left) from the preamp.

Thanks guys!

So basically it's "budget bi-amping" to use the rear outputs of a surround sound amp (as long as you set it to stereo mode)?

But a stereo amp with B speaker outputs is pretty much the same as connecting 2 sets of wires to the same banana plug on the amp?

Cheers,
Simon

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nomis3613

Thanks guys!

So basically it's "budget bi-amping" to use the rear outputs of a surround sound amp (as long as you set it to stereo mode)?

But a stereo amp with B speaker outputs is pretty much the same as connecting 2 sets of wires to the same banana plug on the amp?

Cheers,
Simon

---

Absolutely correct! "Budget bi-amping" is a great term for it, I like it!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nomis3613

Thanks guys!

But a stereo amp with B speaker outputs is pretty much the same as connecting 2 sets of wires to the same banana plug on the amp?

Cheers,
Simon

---

Yes, that is bi-wiring. I have a stereo amp with a single set of speaker terminals which i have bi-wired to my speakers.

Luvtolisten, I've read others have hooked up a 2-ch integrated amp and an HT receiver (using only the RF and LF channels of the receiver) to drive the high-pass and low-pass terminals of the mains loudspeakers. Source is connected to both the int amp and receiver, so I guess volume control is from both units. While not exactly the bi-amping by purists' definition, curious if it's safe to try it and not damage the speakers. If ok, any slight benefits based on opinion or experience, and which unit should be used to drive the HP and LP. Thanks.