Bi-Amp Questions

[wvu80]

Just now, CECAA850 said:

The jumper wire is similar to the metal straps 

Ah, that makes sense.  It just wasn't apparent to me looking at the pictures.

 

So, summing it all up the LSI is made for a bi-amped signal.  All it should take is bi-amp cabling from the AVR and everything should be good to go, no problems.

[wvu80]

3 minutes ago, CECAA850 said:

Dave, in the picture above there are 2 sets of posts on the top hat.  One is in and one is out.  The amp wires go to the input and the output is jumper wired to the bass bin input.

Man, this is been instructive!  That makes a lot more sense now.  I just didn't realize how different the LSI was from the consumer LS.    Thanks!

[jimjimbo]

Ah, that makes sense.  It just wasn't apparent to me looking at the pictures.
 
So, summing it all up the LSI is made for a bi-amped signal.  All it should take is bi-amp cabling from the AVR and everything should be good to go, no problems.

No, the LS I is not made for a bI amped signal. Because it is a split cabinet, there is an output from the HF section to the LF section. Otherwise on a normal La Scala, that connection would have been made internally from the crossover.

[wvu80]

1 minute ago, jimjimbo said:

No, the LS I is not made for a bI amped signal.

Thank you for the clarification, I did have that 100% wrong.  It was the dual set of banana connectors that confused me.

[CECAA850]

10 minutes ago, jimjimbo said:

No, the LS I is not made for a bI amped signal

Look at the schematic on the first page of this thread.  It shows where to cut the wires on the input if you want to bi-amp.

[babadono]

22 hours ago, babadono said:

Passive bi amping? But why?

 

[rplace]

So do I cut the wires inside the binding post's cap/plate AND run 2nd set of wires to the LF Out binding posts AND keep jumper to LF section? Or do I do like originally thought and run 2nd set of wires to LF directly? If the later I'm confused again about no crossover/filtering to LF section

[CECAA850]

11 minutes ago, rplace said:

So do I cut the wires inside the binding post's cap/plate AND run 2nd set of wires to the LF Out binding posts AND keep jumper to LF section? Or do I do like originally thought and run 2nd set of wires to LF directly? If the later I'm confused again about no crossover/filtering to LF section

I know that this is something you're dying to do but really there's no benefit.  To do this correctly, you'd cut the wires in the crossover, run wires to the low and high frequency boxes, eliminate the jumpers and then put some sort of active or passive filter in line to the lf boxes.

 

 

[rplace]

4 minutes ago, CECAA850 said:

I know that this is something you're dying to do but really there's no benefit. 

 

 

I'll take that under advisement, counselor. Maybe I'll switch gears and go with 5 speakers in the garage and multichannel music. The AVR is worthless from resale point of view. Way to heavy to ship. But actually sounds pretty good for an AVR. 

[jimjimbo]

 

4 hours ago, jimjimbo said:

No, the LS I is not made for a bI amped signal. Because it is a split cabinet, there is an output from the HF section to the LF section. Otherwise on a normal La Scala, that connection would have been made internally from the crossover.

4 hours ago, CECAA850 said:

Look at the schematic on the first page of this thread.  It shows where to cut the wires on the input if you want to bi-amp.

 

I did look at the schematic on the first page of this thread, and what I should have said was that the LSI was not SPECIFICALLY made for bi amping.  Sure, you can modify and cut wires (as shown), but I don't think that was the original intended configuration.  Otherwise, why not just give the user the option on the outside of the cabinet?

[Ceptorman]

5 hours ago, CECAA850 said:

There's inputs on the top hat as well as inputs on the bass bin.  I've never bi amped a pair as I see no benefit.

 

Good job Carl, spending all that time teaching someone how to wire up his speakers, when you claim there isn't any benefit. 

You deserve a drink 

[CECAA850]

43 minutes ago, Ceptorman said:

 

Good job Carl, spending all that time teaching someone how to wire up his speakers, when you claim there isn't any benefit. 

You deserve a drink 

Just another service I provide.

[richieb]

1 hour ago, Ceptorman said:

 

Good job Carl, spending all that time teaching someone how to wire up his speakers, when you claim there isn't any benefit. 

You deserve a drink 

 

Well if anyone can serve a drink ----- ^^^^^^

[Dogface]

The purpose of Electronic crossovers for Bi-Amp application are basically two: 1) Passive components by nature "attenuate" the signal - because the active crossover uses transistors which are energized then signal loss should be at a minimum.  2) When bi=amping, the amp is between the crossover and the speaker vs. the passive crossover which goes between amp and speaker.  The result is the the amp only has to operate in a certain bandwidth, therefore, the the amp does not have to operate from say 20Hz to 20KHz but rather 20Hz to 2.5KHz thus not driving the components of the amp quite as hard.  

This idea really came about in the sound reinforcement world where they build amps specifically designed to operate within a certain bandwidth and carefully match the impedance of the amp and speaker as well.