Does bi-amping make a difference?

Advice truly appreciated. I have audio synthesis kit - Desire Decade power amp - using pair of Martin Logans - hybrid - bass speaker and electrostatic panel. VERY tempted to try bi-amping as in the past many moons ago I had a triamp system which blew my socks off.

Does a biamp set up make a significant difference? I would be feeding the extra Desire Decade from a DAX Decade. One amp for bass the other for mid/top electrostatic panel. I'm also using Townshend super tweeters (fantastic) I'm getting the system to sound top notch and tempted that the extra mile may make a difference. Thanks folks.

 

I think it makes a huge difference. No matter how tricky the bass gets, the treble and mid-range stay as sweet as ever.

 

of course getting the extra amp will make a difference anyway!

I had similar quandry, especially since the epos es22 allows tri-amping. In the end I bridged the evo4 and drive the speakers as though with two monos. The bridged evo4 has masses of available grunt, so altho I agree in principle about bi-amping, its only that - in practise ...

btw, have you ever considered trying a different amp?

 

Thanks for replies - tempted to give it a go - I'm a died in the wool audio synthesis fan - the Desire Decade is a fantastic power amp so not really interested in changing amps.

 

BTW Ditton - just read your kit spec - isn't the Transcend CD Transport something else - got one recently.

 

If you try bi-amping are you intending to use the same model of amp for the LF and HF. For example, has anyone tried a valve amp for the mid/high and a solid state one for the bass?

Ditton, have you considered 2 evo 4's (or even 3 evo 4's or 2 evo 6's), still in bridged mode, but one for each speaker?

 

Titian has 200watt valve amps for the main speakers and a Krell for the subs. Works very well. I thought the tonality between them may not match but it does. I'm not sure how a SET vavle amp and SS would work.

 

Surely that's assuming the use of an active crossover?

I've run valves and solid state on a number of occasions. It's no problem as the tonal clues we get a largly formed by the harmonics of the notes covered by the SS bass amp.

 

That would be another improvement yes, but I'd have thought the same applies to a passive xover.

 

No. The amp is still handling the full range signal isn't it?

 

Ahh yes, that was slow of me. I'm sure it still brings improvements though.

 

well, truth is that its a modded Transcend, not the real thing. It now has Ncode fitted and so sings sweetly. Should a s/h Transcend walk down your street do let me know

 

So is it only worth considering bi-amping if you go active?

 

Its a matter of personal taste.

The times I've tried it, I found that the balance between treble and bass shifted.

I put this down to putting too much juice throught the tweeters in relation to the bass cones.

The music also developed a disjointed sound which became more un-nerving over time.

I now always prefer to use the best single power amp I can afford.

I also eschew bi-wiring, which has a similar disjointed effect, although without the treble/bass emphasis change.



I'm sure some are happy doing one/t'other/both, and thats fine but it's not something I'd do again.

 

On my passive mb2s going from monos to bi and then triamping was big improvements all the way.

You must use amps with the same sound (like a set of brystons) and the same sensitivity.

 

IMO, the biggest improvement in Bi-amping is not to use one amp for LF and one for HF (termed 'horizontal' biamping), but rather to get an identical amp and use one for left channel and the other for right ('Vertical' biamping) . however your mileage may vary. I'd recommend trying both and seeing what works for you.

Roy Gregory had an article about it in a recent Hifi+

 

BBV, that's only because the PMC's are hopelessly inefficient. Get some properly designed loudspeakers as Thorsten would say, anf you won't need all that hardware cluttering up your room.

 

92 dbw is hardly hopelessly inefficient. they are designed to be active and therefore benefit from triamping.

 

That's their sensitivity surely? Their efficiency is a wholly different matter, as evidenced by their need for megawatts.