Bi-amping versus mono block amps

[mark4x4]

I'm currenting running a Aragon 8008 MKII for my front mains and an Aragon 8008x3 for my center and surrounds. I want to improve the sound in two channel mode. Which configuration would give me the best sound quality bi-amping or going to mono block amps like the Aragon Palladium 1K. If it matters my front main speakers are Aerial 10T.

Any help would be much appreciated.
Thanks in advance.
mark4x4

[Chuck G]

Everything matters when it comes to 2 channel sound Mark. List the rest of your setup if you don't mind.

Have you tried running your mains with the 8008 X 3 instead of the MKII? The Older 8008 x 3 could be a better amp and worth trying. Also, I believe those 2 amps are different enough that biamping may not be the best choice.

As for the Palladium 1k, that amp would have no trouble driving the Aerial's and I believe the first 125 watts are class A. I'd try the 8008 x 3 first, you may be surprised. I am actually considering an 8008 x 3 myself but I am not sure if it would best my current amp setup (Sherbourn 5/1500a biamping NHT VT2's). I do have my eyes on used ones, when they become available.

[Ricky]

The Aerial 10Ts are one of the tougher loads, in terms of impedance and low sensitivity. Unlike the other new, post-Klipsch Aragon amp models, the 8008mkII is a rebadged 8008BB with two 1.1kVA transformers, and able to handle tough loads better than the 8008x3. In you want better 2 channel sound, you can sell the 8008mkII and get two Palladiums.

Jon Marsh talks about Aragon amps here:

http://www.htguide.com/forum/showthread.php4?t=2805

[Chuck G]

Thanks Ricky, I was hoping the resident Aragon amp freak would show up.

[mark4x4]

Thanks for the replies.........My intentions are either to purchase another MKII to bi-amp or to sell my MKII and buy a pair of Paladiums. I wanted input on which setup would give me better sound.

My system:
Aragon 8008 MKII
Aragon 8008x3
Classe SSP-25
Jolida JD-100 CD player
Marantz 8400 DVD player
Aerial 10T front mains
Aerial CC3B center
Wharfedale Evo 30 for surrounds (future purchase of Aerial LR3 or LR5)
Nodost Blue Heaven and Harmonic Tech Truthlink interconnects
Nordost Blue Heavens speaker cable
Nordost Flatline Gold MKII speaker cable

Thanks,
mark4x4

[Crimson]

Biamping (or triamping) with monoblocks and an active electronic x-over.

I used to run a pair of Magnepan MG-3.6/R with a pair of Bryston 7B-ST monoblocks. Very nice. I then added a pair of Vandersteen subs. Better. A few months ago I bought a Bryston 10B 2-way active x-over and a PSA HCA-2 for the mids/highs, retaining the 7B's on the bottom. Incredible! And most recently, I'm now running a pair of Cary V-12R monblocks for the highs/mids, the Bryston 7B-ST's on the bottom, and the Vandy 2Wq's for the subsonics, effectively triamping the speakers. All I really need at this point is my own personal power generation plant.

Again, to answer your question, IMO an active horizontal biamp setup bests a monoamp setup.

[Ricky]

Mark,

Both biamping with the 8008bb's and using a single Palladium would give you the same power into 4 ohms (600-800 watts...as Aragons are under-rated).

I would think that the sonics on the Palladiums would be better....each Palladium (3000 retail) costs more than the 2 channel 8008bb (2500-2700).

You should sell the 8008 and get two Palladium IIs (comes in either RCA or balanced, but not both).

[ThomasW]

A Palladium is nothing more than a 8008BB running in true balanced differential mono mode. The amplifier circuits inside both amps are identical.

If you're using a pre-amp with true balanced differential outputs, and running balanced interconnects, then a Palladium will give you somewhat better sound compared to a BB.

[Kingdaddy]

True Bi-Amping is a huge improvement if you use a quality active crossover like Crimson's system, but I have a feeling you are talking about passive bi-amping. If you are talking about passive bi-amping then you might not hear any audible improvement, so maybe the monoblock thing is best.

If you are actually froggy enough to by-pass the evil passive networks and try a good active unit then power will not be an issue, in fact you might find (as I did) that most any decent amplifier will do fine as long as the active crossover you choose has independent gain controls for each channel (and it should). in my system I couldn’t tell any difference in sound quality between several different amps once I got the levels set. When you go active and have the drivers directly coupled to the amp's output the so-called signature sound of the amp is pushed aside, no more difficult loads for the amp to see (except electrostats and the like) and no more wasted power through the passive crossover.

125w per channel should be all you need to drive any dynamic driver in a active network, except maybe subs.

However with passive bi-amping it’s always been my understanding that it has about the same hit and miss effect as bi-wiring, if the woofer is pushing a lot of back EMF then you might hear some benefit, if not then probably no benefit. I’m sure Thomas can expound on this better then I can though.

[mark4x4]

I would like to express my appreciation for all the responses, they help tremendously.

In theory which should give better two channel sound bi-amping or using a pair of mono block amps. I know in theory and the real world doesn't always equal the same thing but from the stand point of theory only which is better?

Thanks again,
Mark

[ThomasW]

There is no inherent sonic advantage to using 2 amplifiers while retaining the passive internal crossover; unless the single amp being used lacks adequate power, or unless one want's the sonic signature of a specific amplifier driving a certain section of the loudspeaker (ie solid state on the woofer, tubes on the tweeter).

The primary benefit to using active filters is the elimination of the inductors and other passive components in the signal path. That being said one runs the risk of sonic compromise unless the active filters are custom designed to the specific performance characteristics of the individual drivers mounted in their baffles. Using generic active crossovers has the potential to actually decrease the performance compared to the stock passive units.

[Ricky]

Mark,

I sent you a PM.

[rglaze]

Biamping (or triamping) with monoblocks and an active electronic x-over.

I used to run a pair of Magnepan MG-3.6/R with a pair of Bryston 7B-ST monoblocks. Very nice. I then added a pair of Vandersteen subs. Better. A few months ago I bought a Bryston 10B 2-way active x-over and a PSA HCA-2 for the mids/highs, retaining the 7B's on the bottom. Incredible! And most recently, I'm now running a pair of Cary V-12R monblocks for the highs/mids, the Bryston 7B-ST's on the bottom, and the Vandy 2Wq's for the subsonics, effectively triamping the speakers. All I really need at this point is my own personal power generation plant.

Again, to answer your question, IMO an active horizontal biamp setup bests a monoamp setup.

Hello
Need Help
I was wondering when you use the active crossover method with Two like amps.
Do you cable directly to the Mags 3.6's. I have 3.5R's and do i OMIT the external
crossover boxes that magnepan provides. I realize the T / Mid crossover in the
speaker can not be defeated.
Regards
Ron

[Crimson]

I was wondering when you use the active crossover method with Two like amps. Do you cable directly to the Mags 3.6's. I have 3.5R's and do i OMIT the external crossover boxes that magnepan provides.

Assuming you're using an outboard active XO, remove the external XO.

[BobS]

Mark, what did you do?

Mark, if you're still reading this forum, please tell us what you did and how it came out. I'm about to make the same decision

I also PMed you just in case you're no longer looking at the thread.

thanks, Bob

[akhter]

There is no inherent sonic advantage to using 2 amplifiers while retaining the passive internal crossover; unless the single amp being used lacks adequate power, or unless one want's the sonic signature of a specific amplifier driving a certain section of the loudspeaker (ie solid state on the woofer, tubes on the tweeter).

The primary benefit to using active filters is the elimination of the inductors and other passive components in the signal path. That being said one runs the risk of sonic compromise unless the active filters are custom designed to the specific performance characteristics of the individual drivers mounted in their baffles. Using generic active crossovers has the potential to actually decrease the performance compared to the stock passive units.

My arcam manual says i will get better performance from the front L+R if i bi-amp them using the 6th and 7th amps. Since i am still left with using the passive crossovers, does this mean that i really don't get any benefit?