Swissdog

I finally got the passive biamp thing to work...but didn't like it. I have finally settled in on pre-out from my NAD C740 receiver to the aux-in on my NAD 3020. I chose this setup for the following reasons; 1. I couldn't get good sound with any combination of amp/HF/LF/wire combination with the biamp setup. I also had a problem with some serious hum with the biamp setup. Hope I didn't damage anything! Still can't help thinking something is seriously wrong with my C740 receiver since I don't think it sounded this bad when I first got it. 2. Although I got better sound than the receiver by going to the main-in on the 3020, I chose to go aux-in instead as it offers the opportunity to take advantage of the 3020's apparently superior tone controls, loudness button, and warmer top end. This has yielded by far the best sound yet from my KLF20's. Sort of disappointing that it's so much better than the C740 since I could have saved myself some time and money by simply utilizing my old 3020 and buying a separate receiver instead. Again, there MUST be something wrong with the C740 since I swear it sounded better when I bought it! The only drawback to the 3020 is the rated power of 20wps, although my listening levels will rarely if ever push it anywhere near the limit. Mdeneen, you say that most receiver amp sections are just okay, with emphasis placed on power rather than sound. However, NAD's design philosophy is founded on countering exactly that weakness with most manufacturers. They focus on sound first and believe that most power ratings are, well, overrated. It's not continuous power rating that matters, it's the ability to deliver the short bursts as needed. You won't see huge continuous power ratings on NAD equipment, but they claim their units have the ability to deliver short bursts as needed far beyond the continuous power rating. So, while I did get better sound quality by routing directly through the amp of my 3020 instead of the receiver amp, the REALLY BIG gain in sound came when routing through the 3020's preamp via the aux-in. Would this suggest there really isn't much difference in the amps on the two components, but a huge difference in what the preamp sections are doing to the sound? Again, anybody see any equipment-damaging reasons why I shouldn't be running pre-out on the receiver to the aux-in on the integrated? Seems like double-preamping to me, but it sure sounds good. Could the two stage preamp be filtering the sound in a way that sounds better? Surpressing the high end a little by going through so much circuitry?

Mdeneen, I wonder if your experimentation with using passive biamping to "level adjust" the two networks may have been born out of my inquiries about using passive biamping to tame the extremely hot highs on my KLF20's? I'm glad to hear you like the idea! I gave it a shot but must have wired something incorrectly since all I could get was the HF. Gave up until tonight when I tried something else. Figuring I had messed up the Y-connector splits, I thought I would just try running the pre-outs on my NAD receiver directly to the main-in on my NAD3020 integrated just to test whether or not something was wrong with the 3020. It worked, and with some noticable improvement in sound. Then I tried the pre-out on the the receiver to the aux-in on the integrated and WOW! I was amazed at how my speakers suddently sounded like they're supposed to! TOTALLY different sound than the receiver. MUCH better balance, blend, and low and behold, the low end finally made an appearance! Almost too much low end on some recordings. Or maybe it just seems like too much relative to the total lack of it that I'm used to. Overall the sound was so much warmer and listenable. No more harshness. Then, since it was late and my son had just gone to bed forcing me to listen at very low volume levels, I tried the loudness botton on the integrated (blasphamy!) and was further amazed at how it brought out the fullness in sound at the lower volumes. What the heck does a loudness botton do anyway? For those purists out there who would never consider actually engaging a loudness botton I must wonder, if they're so bad why would NAD put one on the 3020 that was so highly rated? The receiver does not have one. Anyway, I can only conclude one of a few of things; 1. The old NAD 3020 simply sounds better than my new NAD receiver by a long shot, proving that it's reputation is well deserved, and that amps really do sound different, or 2. The preamp section of the NAD 3020 imparts more or better tonal balance than the preamp section of the receiver (by the way, is it bad to be running a signal first through the preamp of my receiver then right into the preamp of the integrated via the aux-in, essentially double-preamping the signal?), or 3. There is something wrong with my receiver which is causing the signal sent to my speakers to be poorly balanced and lacking in fullness and low end, or finally 4. The cheap Walmart 16 gauge speaker cable I switched to for this experiment sounds far better than the expensive Kimber cable I normally use. Not sure I buy into the argument that cable makes that much difference. So to get back to the original topic of this thread, now that I know my old integrated does indeed work, I will attempt the passive biamp setup again tomorrow. If I can finally figure out how to hook it up correctly, and since my two amps seem to have totally different tonal qualities, I think I'll try switching back and forth with one first on the HF, then on the LF to see which combo sounds better. I think I may be amazed! I, like Mdeneen, kind of like the idea of being able to level adjust the two networks to smooth the sound depending on the recording. If I can't get it to work I think I may permenantly bypass the amp section of my receiver in favor of running instead to the aux-in on my old NAD 3020. The NAD 3020 has another connection right next to the main-in called a lab-in. Can anyone tell me what that's for?

I'm in for a pair in a heart beat, but only if manufactured to the original standards (see Mdeneens post on Sad report card for KLF30). I would even fork over the money for an exotic wood! Oh, to dream the impossible!

Thanks mdeneen. Actually, the only gear currently running through the integrated is my turntable, and that is going into the phono inputs, then out through the tape-out. This is because the integrated HAS a phono preamp, but the receiver does not. The volume on the integrated shouldn't effect the phono preamp or tape-out should it? So in conclusion, running the "y's" into the aux instead of the main-in on the integrated will allow me to independently set the volume of the highs vs. the lows, then once I've got the balance I want I could just use the volume on the receiver to adjust the whole rig up or down.

Thanks! One last question. The thing that got me started on this whole train of thought is that I kind of feel like the highs on the KLF's overpower the lows a bit. I got to wondering if there might be something I could do with my existing equipment to get better balance between the highs and the lows. Would it be unreasonable to think that with this passive bi-amp setup I could INTENTIONALLY set the volume levels between the integrated amp and the receiver incorrectly in order to boost the bass relative to the highs, or reduce the highs relative to the lows? Would this simply be a round about way of creating a very basic equalizer, or would this avoid the colorization of the signal that many of you have suggested is the downfall of equalizers?

Slowly but surely I think this is all starting to sink in. So if I am understanding correctly, if I elect not to mess with the xovers in the speaker, then my only options are biwiring or passive biamping. And, it sounds as though what mdeneen is suggesting is in fact passive biamping. Correct? If I choose passive biamping as suggested by mdeneen, then all I really need to purchase is two Y-connectors, and another set of speaker wires. Since all of my equipment is already connected to the receiver, I would simply make the following connections; 1. Plug one Y-connector into the left channel pre-out on the receiver. Plug one leg of that Y-connector into the left channel main-in on the receiver, and the other leg into the left channel main-in on the integrated amp (or maybe the aux in on the integrated as suggested by John? Still not clear which is correct). 2. Repeat step one for the right channels. 3. Remove the terminal straps on the KLF's and run a set of speaker wire from the receiver terminals to the top, HF terminals on the KLF's. 4. Run another set of speaker wire from the integrated terminals to the lower, LF terminals on the KLF's. 5. I imagine I could leave my turntable connected to the integrated phono inputs, with a connection from the tape out on the integrated to the aux in on the receiver. It shouldn't make any difference that the signal from the turntable is going first through the integrated preamp, then out the tape-out to the receiver preamp, then BACK to the integrated main-in (aux in?), right? Did I get it right?!? Can I hurt the speakers, or any of the equipment if I, say, don't get good balance between the volume on the two amps and end up boosting the bass a little too much? Will this all be an exercise in futility, or can I expect to hear REAL improvements (tighter more prominent bass balance for example, or better imaging)? Here's the real question; given the same equipment in your home, would you opt for a passive biamp setup like this?

Whoa! It didn't take much for you to get over my head on this, but thanks for the advice gentlemen. John, I am confused about the solution you offered. You mentioned that 'true' biamping requires the internal speaker x-overs to be bypassed. Does that mean that in addition to the F-mods I would need to get inside the speaker to disconnect the x-overs, or are the F-mods a way of effectively bypassing the speakers x-overs (i.e. by separating the frequencies before they get to the speaker you are eliminating the need for the speaker x-overs to do any work)? I don't think I'm willing to open up the speakers and make any changes at this point. Would your solution allow for one volume control (the receiver) to rule, or would I have to play with both to get the balance I'm looking for? It might actually be kind of cool to have that ability! Would I need to remove the straps on the speakers under your senario? You mentioned two pairs of F-mods, and I think you are suggesting that both the high pass and low pass be purchased at the same x-over point, correct? The way I'm reading your instructions, however, I only see one of each F-mod being used (i.e. one high pass, and one low pass). What am I missing? Do you really mean that the low pass line should be connected to the 3020 aux in, or did you intend to say that it should be connected to the main in? Would it make any difference? What do you mean by 'passive' biamping or biwiring? What does Harrison Labs mean when they talk about F-mods being 12db/octave, or 24db/octave when stacked? Sorry for all the stupid questions, but I really don't know much about this stuff. I'm very eager to learn though, so your adice is very much appreciated!

Okay, I admit it. I have a problem. The stereo bug has bitten me and I'm hooked. Because of that I find myself wanting to experiment a little, but don't have the technical know-how. I need your expertise to help me with my curiosity about whether or not I can bi-amp with my existing equipment, whether or not there would be a valid motive for doing so, and how I would do it. Here is my equipment list: Klipsch KLF20 speakers (wish they were Cornwalls, but whose complaining. And the date for placing Cornwalls back into production is when? I'm there with my check in hand when that happens!) NAD 3020 integrated amp (rated about 35 wps) NAD C740 stereo receiver (also about 35 wps) NAD 515 CD changer NAD 613 tape deck Kimber braided cable Intend to buy some Radioshack cable if bi-amping or bi-wiring Notice the NAD theme? Anyway, both amps have pre-out and main-in connections. So my list of questions is long: - Can this equipment be connected in a way that would provide bi-amping? - Again, if I could, is there a valid motive for doing so? - What improvements, if any, might I expect, and would they likely be dramatic, or subtle? - Which amp would I use for highs, and which for lows? Both have the NAD soft clipping feature. I always listen at volume levels not much beyond normal conversation levels. - Which cable would be most appropriate for the highs, and which for the lows, given that I think the speakers sound a little bright on the top end? - Would both volume controls come into play, or could it be done so that one volume control or the other would control all? - Which component would receive the source devices (CD, tape deck, turntable, VCR)? Currently running the turntable through the 3020 since the C740 doesn't have a phono preamp). - Can you give me idiot proof, step-by-step instructions (i.e. connect component A to B using the X out from A to the Y in on B, and so on)? If these are dumb questions, I apologize for wasting your time. If it can be done, I look forward to your feedback, and thank you all in advance!