Kid, Klipsch owners, biamping etc.

[Mr Peabody]

I have a second system in my workout room and that's where my Heresy III are. I finally got around to playing with biamping, here's the set up and result, it's lethal. Kid you have to biamp your Heresys, you have enough amps to do it and I am amazed at the improvement. My advice for any other Klipsch owner as well, at least try it.

I am using the Emotiva USP-1 & ERC-1, from the sub out I have an Emo Ultra 12 crossed at about 60 Hz, from the full range outputs I have a Bryston 3b-st to the Heresy 12's and from the high pass outputs I have a Parasound hca-750 to the mid & high horns. The 750's gain is backed off a bit from full so the horns are better balanced with the 12" driver. This set up is a monster with serious, dangerous, SPL that hits hard and remains clear.

I don't know if every speaker made to biamp can be improved on by doing so but my Heresy's sure did. It really helped to get better balance between the horns and woofer but I also seem to have some overall improvement in clarity. The USP-1 is ideal for this with all the preamp outputs, it has to be an improvement over using "Y" adaptors, each amp gets full signal strength with no splitting.

[Mr Peabody]

Just as a side note, I used Linn RCA's from preamp to each power amp, Bluejeans from CDP to pre, Tara Labs speaker cables to horns and Transparent speaker cables to the woofers. This is sounding good as is, the only thing I will try is to see if a set of Audio Note RCA's are an improvement over the Bluejeans. I'm just using what I have around.

[JohnMichael]

I have always heard that true biamping requires an external crossover. Preamp to crossover and the highs to one amp and the lows to the other amp. Using Y adaptors the full siganl is going to the tweeter and the full signal is going to the woofers. so the benefit of biamping is still dependant on the internal crossover of the speaker.

[Mr Peabody]

True biamping would require an external crossover upstream of amplification but that would require going into the speaker and eliminating, or totally bypassing, the internal crossover. I didn't want to take it that far and not many I know do. I'm not sure how different a typical crossover is from one that is in a speaker that allows biamping. Since the straps between sets of terminals have to be removed for biamping I suspect the woofers and horns have there own separate filters. The provided method by manufacturers isn't optimum but still allowed for improvement for these speakers and some custom adjusting of the sound.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Bi-amping a speaker that is already uber efficient is a waste of money and time.

[Mr Peabody]

Whether to biamp has nothing to do with the efficiency of a speaker both high and low efficiency speakers come with the option. The type of biamping JM was referring to is mostly in the Pro realm and most of those are high efficiency. It was not a waste of money as I already had the equipment nor a waste of time as the result was quite good, and as such it still wouldn't have been a waste if I had spent more money.

[harley .guy07]

Biamping any speaker can produce good results if done correctly with the right quality equipment and is not a waste of time. Yes a more efficient speaker will generally get more than loud enough for almost anyone with a single amp setup but biamping gives the amps room to breath and to do their thing with ease which can produce a more ease of presentation and let the equipment run at its best without as much heat build up and such.. And as Mr Peabody said he was able to turn the horns down in order to balance things out so in his case it helped in more that one way.

[thekid]

Mr. P

Sorry I have been away a bit and just noticed your post.
I have 2 sets of Heresy's the Hersey I's are the fronts of my HT system powered by my Pioneer VSX-815. While I do listen to them at times for music I am not sure there would much point in Bi-amping them though I have thought about using the pre-outs on the Pioneer to add an amp just to see if it adds a little oomph to the system.

My Heresy II's are currently hooked up to my Fischer X-100-C tube amp. I am not if I should/could use the tube amp to bi-amp them. The other option would be to put them back with my Adcom system. The 545II is the main amp there but I have a 535L that is sitting with a minor problem. I think that would be a real possibility though I am a bit ignorant on how exactly I would biamp this set up. My pre-amp is an Adcom 555 if that helps.

[Mr Peabody]

Hi Kid, it does add more punch or impact, especially if you have an amp on the horns with a gain control. Biamping alone seemed to help but bringing the horns volume down slightly to give a more balanced presentation really made them hammer. It makes them give you more of a hit in the chest feel.

Your Fisher receiver would be a cool set up if it had preamp outputs. The Fisher could run the horns while one of your solid state amps could run the woofers.

Using the 555, first remove the metal straps from between the terminals, hook the more powerful amp to the woofers, bottom set of terminals, then the other amp to the top set of terminals to drive the horns. The 555 probably only has one set of preamp outputs so you will have to use a "Y" adaptor with the single end to the preamp, run one leg of the left to bottom amp and the other left to top amp, then do the same with the right. The 545 on woofers and 535 on horns should make a nice combo but as mentioned being able to adjust one amp or the other gain really helps tailor the sound.

If you try it let me know what happens.

Since the Heresy only plays down so far I'd set the main speakers of your HT to "small" and let the sub carry the low end up to about 60Hz or so. This may help there. Out of curiosity what are you using for a center channel speaker? If interested I have an Academy in great condition.

[thekid]

Okay things are a little clearer. You can bi-amp Heresy III's easily because of the two sets of terminals. My Heresy II's only have one set of terminals so I guess I would either need an external X-Over mentioned earlier or change the existing X-over to accomodate the extra terminals for the HF. Probably not the easiest thing for someone of my limited tech skills.

I'd love to take the Academy off your hands but resources are limited as child #2 starts college next month. I am currently using a Klipsch Synergy C1 that I got off of CL as my center. It is capable for the room but I know I could do better. There is a KV series center on CL in my area and I tried to swap my Marantz 2245 for it but the owner wants cash. As for the settings on my HT I do have the Heresy I's set to small and feed the bass to my NHT SubOne. If you are standing next to my house when it moves air you can feel it a bit.......... :D

[Mr Peabody]

Oh, I assumed all the Heresy were biampable. With one set of terminals it probably isn't worth the effort. I'd be interested in knowing any difference in crossovers in the I, II & III.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Biamping any speaker can produce good results if done correctly with the right quality equipment and is not a waste of time. Yes a more efficient speaker will generally get more than loud enough for almost anyone with a single amp setup but biamping gives the amps room to breath and to do their thing with ease which can produce a more ease of presentation and let the equipment run at its best without as much heat build up and such.. And as Mr Peabody said he was able to turn the horns down in order to balance things out so in his case it helped in more that one way.


The simplest solution is to buy one amp with enough power that you have the headroom "to let the system breathe", and to give the sound that ease of presentation. There is no audible advantage to bi-wiring any speaker, the internal crossover is still at play in this case. .

Personally, I don't think bi-wiring is the cure for a poor inter-driver balance - a problem with some models in the Klipsch line. Rather than bi-wiring, there are a number of crossover and driver upgrades for the Heresy that are cheaper and easier to pull together, with definite sonic benefits. One cheap way I have read about involved stuffing a bit of toilet paper in the midrange horn. I read that on the Klipsch forum a long time ago.


Real bi-amping requires a bypass of the internal crossover, and active or passive filters to keep the highs out of the bass driver(and amp), and lows out of the tweeter(and amp). The crossover should be set before the amplification. This is not the setup the OP is describing, so I am doubtful of the conclusions. Powered professional monitors provide true bi-amping as they operate exactly like the before mentioned.

The OP has bi-wired his speakers, not Bi amped them. There is a difference.

[JohnMichael]

I remember the Powered Advent Speaker which was truly bi-amped. You would run an interconnect from the preamp to the speakers. The crossover would divide the signal and send the upper frequencies to the tweeter amp and the lows to the woofer amp. The tweeter amp was of lower wattage than the woofer amp. As I remember a very powerful and dynamic sound.

[harley .guy07]

The simplest solution is to buy one amp with enough power that you have the headroom "to let the system breathe", and to give the sound that ease of presentation. There is no audible advantage to bi-wiring any speaker, the internal crossover is still at play in this case. .

Personally, I don't think bi-wiring is the cure for a poor inter-driver balance - a problem with some models in the Klipsch line. Rather than bi-wiring, there are a number of crossover and driver upgrades for the Heresy that are cheaper and easier to pull together, with definite sonic benefits. One cheap way I have read about involved stuffing a bit of toilet paper in the midrange horn. I read that on the Klipsch forum a long time ago.




Real bi-amping requires a bypass of the internal crossover, and active or passive filters to keep the highs out of the bass driver(and amp), and lows out of the tweeter(and amp). The crossover should be set before the amplification. This is not the setup the OP is describing, so I am doubtful of the conclusions. Powered professional monitors provide true bi-amping as they operate exactly like the before mentioned.

The OP has bi-wired his speakers, not Bi amped them. There is a difference.

I actually think that he was referring to bi amping not bi wiring since he is using multiple amplifiers to separately drive his low end and high end and even though he is still using the internal crossovers what he is doing is true bi amping its just not with active crossovers he is still using the passive crossovers in the cabinets which is fine if you are satisfied with the crossover point and have not done a lot of modifying of the speakers. Yes passive crossovers do drain some power but there are not very many active crossovers in the home audio world that are very clean when used with high end equipment and most pro sound unit make you switch all the connections going from RCA to XLR unless all of your home stuff runs XLR connectors already then it changes things but I would say you would have to go with quite a pricey pro sound unit for it not to ad distortions or be as quiet as the rest of the components.

[JohnMichael]

I actually think that he was referring to bi amping not bi wiring since he is using multiple amplifiers to separately drive his low end and high end and even though he is still using the internal crossovers what he is doing is true bi amping its just not with active crossovers he is still using the passive crossovers in the cabinets which is fine if you are satisfied with the crossover point and have not done a lot of modifying of the speakers. Yes passive crossovers do drain some power but there are not very many active crossovers in the home audio world that are very clean when used with high end equipment and most pro sound unit make you switch all the connections going from RCA to XLR unless all of your home stuff runs XLR connectors already then it changes things but I would say you would have to go with quite a pricey pro sound unit for it not to ad distortions or be as quiet as the rest of the components.


Yes he is using two amps but true biamping is preamp to crossover and highs to one amp and lows to the other amp. Then the output of the high frequency amp to the tweeter and low frequency amp to the woofer. A 3 way speaker would need to be triamped. He is doing a pseudo biamping.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Yes he is using two amps but true biamping is preamp to crossover and highs to one amp and lows to the other amp. Then the output of the high frequency amp to the tweeter and low frequency amp to the woofer. A 3 way speaker would need to be triamped. He is doing a pseudo biamping.

You are correct JM, pseudo biamping, but more appropriately bi-wiring.

[harley .guy07]

bi wiring still only uses one amp and he uses two amps so it is bi amping he is just not going the full distance that bi amping can do with active crossovers that completely separate the frequencies that each amp and driver receive and does not use passive crossovers inside the speakers, This is true bi amping but but it not used in home audio very much because most people do not have the knowledge and don't want the fuss of matching levels and all that is necessary for full bi amping but what Mr. Peabody is doing is a form of bi amping not biwiring which would only use one amplifier.

[harley .guy07]

Before I worked selling high end home audio I worked in a car audio shop installing car audio components and bi amping and tri amping was the norm especially seperating the bass from the midbass and higher frequencies with electronic crossovers(active crossovers) so I know what these kind of setups are and the difference between biwiring and biamping.

[JohnMichael]

Since both amps are receiving the full frequency range it is not biamping. One of the advantages of bi or tri is the amps can be tailored to the frequency driver it will be driving. The woofer needing the most power, the midrange a little less and the tweeter needing the least. Maybe the correct term should be biwiring with dual amps. If the Y connectors are not of high quality I wonder if they will offset any chance of improvement when using two amps?

[Mr Peabody]

JM, I was happy with pseudo. I gave the set up in my original post, I am not using "Y" adaptors. The USP-1 has a sub out with crossover, high pass out with 50-250hz and a full range. Cool features for a preamp. I'm not handy with a solder iron nor do I wish to diminish the value of my speakers by tinkering with them but I could almost do a true biamp with this preamp. Well I could do a 2-way without a sub. The amp I have on the mid/high horns also has a gain control.

[harley .guy07]

Well i understand that both amps receiving a full range signal is not conventional bi amping but using two amps to drive a system, one for the bass end, and one for the treble end, even though the amps are receiving a full range signal the amps themselves are only powering drive units that are crossed over to run certain frequencies. and while it is not as good as actively crossed over bi amping in its conventional form due to the obvious reasons there can still be benefits to what Mr P has done in some systems and have seen this for myself and I have had extensive work in bi amping, Tri amping, with or without and electronic or (active) crossover before the amplifiers. So in a nutshell in a conventional sense he is not truly bi amping because the lack of a active crossover but he is getting an added sonic and dynamic effect by running separate amps for the low end and tweeters on his two way speakers through the passive crossovers which can add to the dynamic ability of the system no matter how you look at it.

[JohnMichael]

Well i understand that both amps receiving a full range signal is not conventional bi amping but using two amps to drive a system, one for the bass end, and one for the treble end, even though the amps are receiving a full range signal the amps themselves are only powering drive units that are crossed over to run certain frequencies. and while it is not as good as actively crossed over bi amping in its conventional form due to the obvious reasons there can still be benefits to what Mr P has done in some systems and have seen this for myself and I have had extensive work in bi amping, Tri amping, with or without and electronic or (active) crossover before the amplifiers. So in a nutshell in a conventional sense he is not truly bi amping because the lack of a active crossover but he is getting an added sonic and dynamic effect by running separate amps for the low end and tweeters on his two way speakers through the passive crossovers which can add to the dynamic ability of the system no matter how you look at it.



The Klipsch Heresy is a three way speaker with a cone woofer and horn loaded midrange and a horn loaded tweeter.

[harley .guy07]

well that being the case then he has one amp powering the woofers and the other powering to two horns for midrange and treble. I think I got them confused with another model but the same principle applies except that the highs amp runs 2 drivers a midrange and tweeter horn.

[JohnMichael]

I fully comprehend what he has done. I also understand why it provides a benefit. My only problem is with our limitations of audio terms. It is somewhere between bi-wiring and bi-amping but it is not bi-amping in the truest sense of the word.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I fully comprehend what he has done. I also understand why it provides a benefit. My only problem is with our limitations of audio terms. It is somewhere between bi-wiring and bi-amping but it is not bi-amping in the truest sense of the word.

In this case there is no limitation. The OP is bi-wiring not bi-amping. Bi-amping places the crossovers before the power stages, and there is quite frankly no way to bi-amp the Heresy. There are very few speakers that allow bi-amping, but plenty that support bi-wiring.

http://www.audioforums.com/forums/showthread.php?14401-Bi-wire-vs-Bi-amp

[JohnMichael]

I vote for dual amp bi-wiring.

[harley .guy07]

I am pretty much done with this conversation, If I wanted to run around in circles I would just go outside my house and do it and not waste time of my computer arguing about the same thing. I know what I know and my mind is not going to change and it sounds like yours isn't either so I will just leave you to believe what you want.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I vote for dual amp bi-wiring.

Agreed...a chicken sandwich for JM!!

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

I am pretty much done with this conversation, If I wanted to run around in circles I would just go outside my house and do it and not waste time of my computer arguing about the same thing. I know what I know and my mind is not going to change and it sounds like yours isn't either so I will just leave you to believe what you want.

I believe in what is factual, and I proved it with the link. So the only thing you know is that your information is wrong. You cannot call a pig a dog because both have a tail and four legs. You cannot call a mouse a cat because both have four legs and a tail. And you cannot call bi-wiring bi-amping because both use external amps driving different drivers. There is a very distinct difference between the two whether you choose to recognize that or not.

Not trying to be disrespectful, just factual.

[Mr Peabody]

Actually, T, all your link proved is that others disagree on the topic and other forums are not an authority on anything, they are no more or less qualified than we are.

[harley .guy07]

thanks Mr. P for allowing these people to know that just because another forum says something does not mean that it is any more right than what we are saying. Other than that thats all I have to say as well.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

Actually, T, all your link proved is that others disagree on the topic and other forums are not an authority on anything, they are no more or less qualified than we are.

No it does not prove that at all. It proves that there is a difference between bi-amping and bi-wiring - something I have know since I purchased the powered ATC speakers for one of my audio tracking rooms. It is unfortunate that with all of your "supposed" audio knowledge that you have no clue about the difference between the two.

Just to show you how wrong you are, and why I think you are hearing things(you do have a history of this..remember HDMI?), here are several more links that describe the difference between bi-wiring and bi-amping.

http://www.audioholics.com/education/frequently-asked-questions/the-difference-between-biamping-vs-biwiring

Here are several key comments from this link.

There are mixed opinions about biwiring. I for one biwire my mains simply because I have the means to do so as I own a pair of specific biwire cables given to me as a gift. The sonic differences are subtle, if any.

This is why I think you are hearing things. Nobody I know can hear the difference between a bi-wired and non bi-wired set up, even on speakers with much higher resolution than the Heresy can achieve.

Notice this comment as well...

There are some benefits if you are biamping with identical amps in the system. By doing so, you are now driving the speaker system with dedicated amplifiers for the High Pass (HP) and Low Pass (LP) portions. This may help in bass response, dynamics, and overall fidelity.

Since you are not doing this with your Heresy's, then you are not bi-amping, you are bi-wiring. You even admitted that you did not mess with the crossover system - and there is also the fact that the Heresy's cannot be bi-amped, they can only be bi-wired.

Here is another link:

http://www.axiomaudio.com/tips_biwiring_and_biamping.html

Notice these words as well...

Will it sound any different if you biwire? Some users think it does, but I've never heard any differences, nor have any of our laboratory measurements or scientifically controlled double blind listening tests ever demonstrated there are audible differences.

Oh, and notice these words as well....

Bi-amping, or biamplification, is used mainly in professional sound reinforcement applications, where extremely high levels of loudness are required. Here big, separate amplifiers powering the low frequencies, and smaller amps for the midrange will increase overall output. Sometimes they will use a separate outboard electronic crossover (the speaker's internal crossover is disabled or bypassed entirely) so the operator can vary and adjust individual crossover frequencies, tailor the “slope” of the crossover to match the strengths of each set of drivers, and also adjust the relative sonic balance of bass, midrange and treble to suit the environment. This is important for huge auditoriums or outdoor events where separate arrays of treble and midrange horns are operating with big “bass bins,” but such systems have no place in domestic home theater systems in normal rooms.

Notice the description on how bi-amping works. Also notice the comments of necessity in the home environment - hence why so few speakers have actual bi-amping capabilities. Notice how he states bi-amping is for application that require extremely high levels of loudness. A highly efficent speaker such as the Heresy does not need to be bi-amped, it is capable of very high output levels without it.

Here is another link

http://www.oregondv.com/Audio_FAQ_Bi-Wire_Bi-amp%20.htm

Notice this comment...

True bi-amping involves hooking the preamp to an electronic crossover that replaces the passive crossover network in the speaker. The active crossover then connects to multiple power amplifiers. For example, one amplifier for the woofer and another amplifier for the mid/highs. The internal speaker crossover network must be eliminated. bi-amping is a difficult and expensive approach that is not typically employed.

Here is another link

http://www.soundstage.com/synergize/synergize031998.htm

and another...

http://www.wired4sound.net.au/public_html/bi_wiring.pdf

Now to top this off, one of the most informative posts about the difference between bi-wiring and bi-amping.

http://forum.blu-ray.com/speakers/56058-bi-amping-bi-wiring-research-material.html

Notice these comment from major speaker manufacturers on bi-wiring

M&K Doesn't Believe in Bi-Wiring:

or this one..

The late Peter Snell was an early bi-wire fan, and later recanted saying it was ‘baloney’. Many TOP speaker companies now either don’t offer the ‘dual’ terminals at all or do so only for bi-amping purposes. Many speak openly about its detrimental effects.

Now as you can see, there is nothing ambiguous about the difference between bi-wiring and bi-amping. Since you have a history of hearing things no other human can hear, I would take your claims of the audible advantages of bi-wiring the Heresy with not just a bag of salt, but the entire salt factory.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

thanks Mr. P for allowing these people to know that just because another forum says something does not mean that it is any more right than what we are saying. Other than that thats all I have to say as well.

I have provided several more links to prove my point, would you like me to post more? Perhaps it is time to embrace what is factual instead of holding on to what has now been proven as nonfactual.

I mean no disrespect towards you at all, but just want to set the record straight.

[RGA]

I have always been told that Bi Amping was the route to take for speakers that benefit from it. I have also been told that very few speakers actually can take advantage of biwiring and that many makers just put the extra connectors on the back for the "appearances" as for awhile speakers that did not have the fancy connectors were deemed "low end."

The only speakers that I have owned where biwiring works is my Audio Note J speakers - due to the way the terminals on the back are made. They may not be unusual but they're unusual to any speaker I have connected in the past. Looking at the back they have LF on the right and HF on the left. Single wiring you choose either the HF or the LF to make your connections. What is not shown on the picture in the manual is that there is a thin piece of silver wire that connects the LF to the HF. When Biamping or biwiring that piece of silver bar is removed. Page 9 of manual http://www.audionote.co.uk/downloads/manuals/AN-J_manual.pdf

The recommendation is to bi-wire when possible but that a better single cable wire is better than two poorer cables. And Bi-amping is better.

But let's be realistic - the frenzy over these arguments is odd - dealers here will let you take home the wires before you buy - Best-Buy has a 14 day return policy. SO take it home and try it out. I suspect it's going to be very speaker dependent and possibly system and 'ears" dependent. I have not really tired biwiring with my AN J so I can't say (I simply don't have two good runs of wires to do it). I suppose I could give it a try - might be interesting.

[JohnMichael]

RGA I agree the benefits of bi-wiring a speaker can vary widely. I do have a nice pair of Audioquest internally bi-wired cables so I do bi-wire. I think the jumpers supplied with my speakers are what creates the audible improvement when I bi-wire.

The Monitor Audio RS6's if I single wire them sound best when I use the upper frequency terminals and let the jumpers take the lows to the low frequency. Since the RS6's are 2 1/2 way speakers the single wire attached to the upper frequency drives the drivers covering the midrange and tweeter. Only the bottom driver is connected to the low frequency terminal. This minimizes some of the negative effects of the jumpers.

Bi-wiring the Mobile Fidelity OML1's is again an improvement over using the jumpers. When a single wire is connected to the mid/woofer the soundstage in the upper frequencies is narrowed. A rather strange effect when I first heard it. The OML1's strongly suggest that the high and low frequencies cables be of the same guage cables.

I thought about buying better jumpers but since I am pleased with the AQ's I have not bothered. I agree with the idea of not buying cheap cables just to bi-wire. I think your silver jumpers may negate the benefit of bi-wiring.

[Sir Terrence the Terrible]

The speakers you see in my sig are quad amped, which is why you see so many amps. I have the capability to quad-wire, quad-amp, and to use a single amp to power them. I have heard these speakers in all of these incarnations, and I have never been able to hear any improvement between the single amp, and the quad-wire approach. Quad-amping produced a huge improvement, especially during dynamic peaks, so I opted to keep them in this configuration permanently. What is not mentioned in my sig(no space) is the California Audio labs amps that power the sub portion of the speakers and the dedicated subs, and the DSP based crossover and tuning system.

I do not recommend this approach to everyone because of the cost and complexity of set up and calibration. However, when you are in a very big room, the peak dynamic capability comes in handy.

[filecat13]

I acquired a set of JBL L250 speakers for a few hundred dollars, removed all the stock drivers, and disconnected the massive crossover. I then put in a newer version of the 14" woofer, a completely different 8" driver, 4" driver, and 1.5" tweeter. All three of those are Ti drivers, with the 8" and 4" being inverted domes and the tweet being a more or less conventional dome.

A friend from JPL (not JBL) soldered leads direct to the speakers, which we ran out to four Hafler stereo amps. Three amps are 300W/ch at 8 Ohms and the one feeding the woofers is 600W/ch at 8 Ohms.

The amps are fed by two BSS 366T Omnidrive plus speaker management units, with four of their six channels in use for each speaker. My JPL buddy used London Soundweb software to set the crossover points and EQ for each driver, then for each speaker, then for the pair, using calibrated mics and an input board.

This was a lot of effing work and took about four weekends from initial driver testing outdoors (neighbors loved it) to installation and calibration.

This "simple" project ended up costing a lot, though it produced an exceptionally fine set of speakers. This is a real, active quad-amped system.

It bests another active system I have that is bi-amped using an external two-way crossover in a four-way system. Obviously, the internal, passive crossover in this other system is still partially in operation. And this bi-amped system using an external crossover for HP/LP is notably better than it was before doing this.

Most of my other speakers with LF and HF inputs just get one wire in from an amp with plenty of headroom.