Jump to content
SAU Community

Recommended Posts

AV kunce... bought new 5.1 speaker setup.. thinking it would be a direct swap for my existing yamaha speakers... the new ones being a better model have 'bi connection' available as opposed to the old set with just the standard one pair of terminals per front speaker...

apparenty 'bi connection 'decreases modulation distortion caused by electric resistance of the cables and driving current of the speakers. Consequently, purer sound quality can be achieved'

That'll get done on my holidays...

Now the new sub...the old sub was just a direct plug in to both the sub and the amp... new sub has terminals for speaker wire connection or plug in inputs... 1 using a mono pin cable, not included of course, which connects to the 'subwoofer low pass' terminal on the amp... or using an 'audio pin cable', also not supplied, which is a 2 plug setup which goes to the 'split subwoofer' inputs on the amp....

Which of these options would give the best results?

I'm looking at you Odium.

  • Like 1

bi-amped means to split the signal and run two seperate outputs to the speakers

you need an amp that supports channel a and channel b - or dual amp

my setup is like

you basically run two pairs of speaker wires to each speaker

does the amp have speaker A and Speaker B ?

given that it's a 5.1 its unlikey

does the amp have subout ?

bi-amp is better but if your amp doesnt support it, life goes on. just bridge the terminals so that the single speaker wire goes to both terminals if that makes sense

ie dont cross the wires, but merge them

bi-amped means to split the signal and run two seperate outputs to the speakers

you need an amp that supports channel a and channel b - or dual amp

my setup is like

you basically run two pairs of speaker wires to each speaker

does the amp have speaker A and Speaker B ?

given that it's a 5.1 its unlikey

does the amp have subout ?

The instructions that came with the speakers actually say you can put the 2 pairs of cables into the same terminals on the amp if only one pair of front speaker terminals is available..

yamaha_rx_v467_1.jpg

bi-amp is better but if your amp doesnt support it, life goes on. just bridge the terminals so that the single speaker wire goes to both terminals if that makes sense

ie dont cross the wires, but merge them

yeah you can split the wires, use a bridge tool and run completely seperate - from two seperate outputs

so on my stereo amp

i have channel A and channel B on the amp

Channel A goes to speakers on input #1 on the speakers

channel b goes to speakers on input #2 on the speakers

then on the amp when Channel A and B are turned on you hear normal music

if you only turn on channel a - you only hear trebble, if you only turn on B you only hear bass

Why would you ever want only treble or bass?

From what these instructions say, its not about doing that at all, just about increasing the sound quality... They're connected as normal for now, if I cbf I'll do the bi connection using the single front speaker terminal pairs, but I doubt I'll be able to hear any difference anyway.

As for the sub, the speaker wire option with my amp only having the 1 set of front speaker terminals, I'll go with the AV cable connection instead.

What you're referring to is Bi-Wiring, not Bi-Amping... very different concepts... and neither will increase your chances of a threesome with two bi girls, trust me, I know... The Onkyo Sales Rep lied to me.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bi-wiring .... "Buy-Wiring", ha.

Your success will only determine the type of car that I buy you, not whether I buy you a car or not...I trust you'll look after it as if you had saved for it yourself

/genyparent

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.



  • Similar Content

  • Latest Posts

    • Ok guys thank you very much. GCG highflow it is then 🙂 
    • forgot to mention that when it does this it does not kill the engine, but I have not kept the pedal down long enough to let it, as I see no reason to beat up on it as its got to be something simple, small and dumb causing this.  And as soon as I let off pedal, the engine returns to its normal super smooth operation and rpms re-stabilize quickly, once below 4k. 
    • neither stumble or cut really seem to be an appropriate term....hard to explain its like a rev limiter but at 4k, but it violently shakes engine and entire vehicle as the rpms will not rise over 4k, even with slow acceleration. as soon as it hits 4k, it sounds like entire spark is lost entirely. plugs were 1.1 which I used as such, but later put in new plugs gapped down to .8 changed back after issue arose when I replaced the coils, still does it with either plug gap...damn and it was all running so good.
    • Oh how times have changed! I actually lean it out relative to my water/methanol injector duty cycle. The methanol adds a lot of fueling and you can then lean it out even more due to reduced knock. 
    • Yeah my thoughts are the same, a well thought out WMI setup, would be slightly ahead of just straight E85 and you're also chemically intercooling the charged air, dropping it even further. This is why you need to add so much more fuel as soon as you spray. I remember someone taking me through their set up before (Dennis, has a R33, lives around Cabramatta - no idea if he's still around on this forum). He would target AFR 10:1 on 98, then as WMI ramped on, AFR would lean back up to 11:1. Amazingly, he did this all through his PowerFC, a relay to cut power to his EBC solenoid if there was not enough line pressure on his WMI kit. And of course, if there wasn't any boost made above gate pressure, you wouldn't be accessing the load cells with heaps of timing for WMI. One downside to that rudimentary setup, once the WMI came on, the EBC would unleash the dragon, and of course all the timing. Tyres would fry lol.
×
×
  • Create New...