When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.
I am finalizing my audio system install. I am putting in Polk Audio Momo 6500 2-way components, the JL Audio Stealth boxes for the C6 vert. I was looking at powering it all from an Alpine PDX 4.150 amp. My installer reccomended a seperate Amp for the sub so that we could Bi-amp the from speakers.
Do you all reccomend Bi-amping? What advantage does it provide? Any concers about me bridging two channels to run the subs which need 300Watts?
I am just in ther process of installing my system(very slowly,I know),but am using 3 amps.I have decided to bridge my four channel amp into two(100x4 or 200watts x2@2ohms), to power my front components,as I have decided to eliminate the rear speakers because many state they just muddy the sound stage.I am using two class D amps to run my two 10" rear subs,each amp putting out 300 watts@2 ohms.I certainly don't have the experience of many here,but it would seem to me that the 2 subs would definately put a huge load on one amp that is driving a set of high output front components as well.I'll be anxious to here what the Gurus have to say.
I would not biamp, more amps, more weight, more hassle. Use the crossovers. The crossovers are designed to go with your components.
Originally Posted by Shangreer
Have one more question for you audio gods.
I am finalizing my audio system install. I am putting in Polk Audio Momo 6500 2-way components, the JL Audio Stealth boxes for the C6 vert. I was looking at powering it all from an Alpine PDX 4.150 amp. My installer reccomended a seperate Amp for the sub so that we could Bi-amp the from speakers.
Do you all reccomend Bi-amping? What advantage does it provide? Any concers about me bridging two channels to run the subs which need 300Watts?
Thanks again guys. I think I am going to try to give to give it a listen without bi-amping. It will be relatively easy to add the second amp later (easy for the person not having to try and squeeze it into the cubby hole with the other one, that is).
From: Ok! So you don't believe in conspiracies, but will you acknowledge the possibility of there being coordinated activities in secret places? Texas
The way I understand it, this is not a case of whether to run active or not. The supplied crossovers allow the user to connect 2 seperate inputs from the amplifier. Bi-amping would make available, to an extent, the pros of running active and in your case allow you to send approximately 150 watts rms to each tweeter and woofer, severely overpowering your components. JMHO
but...are the components/crossover designed to go with your car?
They never are. The stock XOs are designed by the mfgr to allow the speakers to sound their best in the largest variety of places and at the lowest possible cost. Therefore they are never intended for any particular position in a vehicle.
As as I've pointed out elsewhere in this forum, going active between the mid and tweet does not relieve you of all the passive crossover components, if this is to be done correctly.
allow you to send approximately 150 watts rms to each tweeter and woofer, severely overpowering your components. JMHO
There's no such thing as too much power. Only too much fat-fingering the volume control by the operator.
The way I understand it, this is not a case of whether to run active or not. The supplied crossovers allow the user to connect 2 seperate inputs from the amplifier. Bi-amping would make available, to an extent, the pros of running active and in your case allow you to send approximately 150 watts rms to each tweeter and woofer, severely overpowering your components. JMHO
Well, if he is biamping through passive, what he can then do is adjust tweeter and woofer levels seperately.
I'm active now, and I like to have the tweeter at -4. The tonality is a little off with female vocals this way, but I think the system is more pleasant sounding overall.