Tweet
Anyone have any thoughts on running an A23 mono with a 6 ohm center channel? I know that Parasound suggests that it not be done. Thanks in advance.
-
-
the amp will experience hotter than normal working temps and will most likely shorten the life of the unit. -
I am using an A23 in mono with a NHT SB3 as the center. It is rated at 8 ohms but dips into the 6 ohm range. Works great, amp does not get very hot nor has it ever overheated.Originally posted by mdw_tpa
good luck
VinceComment
-
Yeah, but a speaker 6 ohms nominal, might dip into 3 ohms... Bye, bye A23. It was a nice amp, now it's toast :BOriginally posted by Vince Helm
PeterComment
-
Just curious. . . do any of you guys think I may CONSIDERABLY reduce the life of a Halo A51 by using it to drive a 4 ohm load,the sensitivity is claimed to be 92 db @1w/meter (these specs are for all channels). . .my amp does run hot. . .especially when I give it a thorough workout!!!!!! :BComment
-
NO, but peter may know better. :WOriginally posted by marcusLast edited by r100gs; 07 December 2006, 09:34 Thursday.JayComment
-
The A51 is designed to work fine with a 4 ohm load. It will not run any hotter in 4 ohms than 8 ohms (Class A power is halved in 4 ohms), nor will a 4 ohm load reduce its life.Originally posted by marcus
I ran my A51 with five power hungry 4 ohm loads (85db/1W/1m) without problems or damage to the amp. (When you're pushing the amp to the limit, the A21 excels. However, at moderate power levels the difference between the amps is subtle).
PeterComment
-
Cheers. . .always a bonus when an opinion comes from someone with previous experience of a similar situationComment
-
This might be a elementary question, but I don't know the answer. I have B&W with 2 sets of posts. If I bi-amp the speakers using a A23 I assume I would connect one channel to one set of posts, and the other channel to the second set. The active cross over would be installed between the pre-amp and amp correct? I already run 2 sets of speaker cables to each speaker from the amp.
My confusion is the speakers are already designed to filter out unwanted frequencies by the crossover inside the speakers, so the active crossover would have to match the frequencies of the passive crossover inside the speakers so I don't create a hole in the frequency response. So I would be filtering the same frequencies twice. Is the advantage the amp only has to amplify a smaller range of frequencies? Is this really an advantage to just using a splitter to feed the same signal to both channels of the amp?Comment
-
If you keep the internal crossovers, you don't need an external crossover. (Like you say, it will be a problem, and cannot really be used with the passive crossover still in place).Originally posted by Pookie007
What you're doing in this case is called "passive bi-amping".
Ideally, you should remove the passive crossover inside the speaker. This will let you do active biamping using an external crossover.Originally posted by Pookie007
The big advantage of this is that you can remove the passive crossover which is often of dubious quality. (Even expensive speakers like the $13k Magnepan 20.1s benefit from removing the passive crossover. Magnepan knows this and houses the woofer/midrange XO in an external box so that it is easily removed by the owner).
Since your speakers already allow for bi-amping, the woofer XO can probably simply be removed/bypassed. However, assuming your speakers are 3-way, your midrange/tweeter XO needs to be modified. You will want to remove/bypass the woofer/midrange XO and still keep the midrage/tweeter XO in place. The latter has to stay, unless you want to go with tri-amping :B
B&W speakers are extremely popular, so I'm sure you'll be able to find other owners that have modified the internal XO and can help you with the specifics...
PeterComment
-
Thanks for the info Peter. Your reply has just convinced me I do not want to bi-amp my speakers. I am still feeling the pain in my wallet from purchasing them. I think I will stick with bridging one to mono for the center, and run the second in stereo for the surrounds. I have an Audio Research for the mains and I am very happy with it.Comment
-
Is your center bi-ampable? In this case, passive biamping may be better than bridging the amp (less stress on the amp).Originally posted by Pookie007
PeterComment
-
Yes, I have the option to passive bi-amp the center. Or I can leave the jumpers in and run the amp mono. Running the amp mono is a little cheaper option because I won't have to buy another set of speaker cables, but if this causes unnecessary strain on the amp, they might be a wise investment.Comment
-
My wife might not let me continue to live here, but since bridging the amps wasn't an issue, the A23s were not as appealing. I took the day off work and pulled the trigger on two Audio Research 150.2 amps. They were showroom units and I got a smoking deal on them. I connected one to the center (passive bi-amping) and used the other for the surrounds. I already had a 300.2 on the mains. I am going to move my Halo A23 to a 2 channel system in another room. Now I just need a new pre-amps with balanced outputs for both systems. Hopefully the tax refund will cover Halo C2 for the main system. I don't see any advantages to a C1 with my setup.
Does the C1 give some advantage over the C2 I should consider? I will never need the display on the unit since it is in the same room with my screen.Comment
-
No. Save some money and go with the C2.Originally posted by Pookie007
PeterComment
-
Only if you need another component video input then!
(I do use the screen on my C1)
CHRIS
Well, we're safe for now. Thank goodness we're in a bowling alley.
- PleasantvilleComment
-
I use an external scaler, so the extra video input won't benefit me. I am going to try and do side-by-side comparisons with the Arcam, Rotel, Krell, and Parasound Halo. I put this post in a different forum that is more appropriate. I didn't want to hijack this thread.Comment
Comment