A Dramatic Improvement

[ClassikFan]

Ever since I got the LK140 back in May I have used it in bi-amp mode with the output of the Classiks amp. I settled on the LK140 powering the high frequency's and the Classik doing the bass, and at the time I was using the Quad 11L's. I continued with this arrangement when I got the PMC TB2+ and all was well with the world, until I had the Majik System demo a few weeks ago and discovered the tighter more powerful bass that it produced. For the last couple of weeks I tried to replicate this by switching the the LK140 to bass duty and the Classik to provide the high notes.

Recent listening sessions had led me to the conclusion that all was not well in the higher frequencies, all the higher notes sounded very un-engaging and I wasn't enjoying the music as much, it didn't get my foot tapping.Well the last couple of days I had got to thinking that the only combination I had not tried was to just use the LK140 in a bi-wire configuration.

Wow the difference was night and day. Power in the bass, insight and involvement in the mids and highs. All of a sudden the system had a togetherness that had been lacking before. A long succession of CD's and LP's were played and everyone enjoyed, even discs that had not sounded so good in the past. I now feel like I have gone more than half wayto wards the improvement that the Majik System showed me without spending a penny.

Off to play some more records now, but it just goes to showone good amp is better than one and a half amps! I think I'll be looking out for a 2nd LK140 on e-bay now!

 

[Kiang]

Have had lk140's before , there is not much of a difference in biamping passive even with lk140's and comparing with a single lk140 in biwire.

Using the classik and one lk140 was not a good idea as is appaernt.

Biamp active with two lk140's - now thats a different kettle of fish altogether.

 

[nixon_fiend]

nah, forget lk140s .. you know what you need for some real klout

 

[Kiang]

nixon_fiend wrote:

nah, forget lk140s .. you know what you need for some real klout

would certainly like to own a klout

I get the feeling though that the ones of eBay are all perhaps the same one(or ones) getting resold again and again - perhaps its a bit of a dud or been mucked about with a bit:Not Sure:

 

[nixon_fiend]

It's a real shame Linn arent catering for the 'un rich' these days .. 6k for their entry boxes is a joke.

Using those RRPs and their prestidgious 'hi end' identity, they should at least release a good sub 1k integrated , like the majik .. but with more power and less upgrade options( a la the nait 5i) I've always liked the LInn sound.. warm, bouncy, reasonably refined.. truly musical, whereas naim always sounded over energised, etched, or plain boring.

But I digress,, I'm glad you have the sound you want Classikfan.. you seem to have thrown a proverbial spanner into the Linn bi/curious amping strategy... I recall hearing that; although being a fine pre amp .. the power amp section of the classik comprised a couple of 'phillips amping modules' of OEM origin . . no suprise then that the 140 cleans up

 

[ClassikFan]

Thanks Nixon, I agree its a shame about Linn having a starter system at £6k but maybe there is more buget kit to follow?

 

[9designs]

General rule seems from my experience, Bi-amp with mixed amps, you end up with the sound equal to the lowest spec amp....... I found the same mixing LK100's and Klouts on Kabers.....

So yes another LK140....or better still an AV5125, it's 5 channel, so Bi-amp ready ... has Switch mode supply and it much better than the grey, flat, 2 dimensional dry LK140.

OR the 2250 just whips the lot of them...better than 2xLK140.....See if you had Linn speakers you'd be right ready for active..... then we enter a whole new league !

 

[Ant]

My current view on it all is thus. Keeping the signal together as much as possible and use as few components as possible will result in a more musical and enjoyable sound.

 

[Kiang]

Ant wrote:

My current view on it all is thus. Keeping the signal together as much as possible and use as few components as possible will result in a more musical and enjoyable sound.

excellent

Always a good idea to read the foreword to any book.

Sign of good things to come eh

 

[Ant]

Kiang wrote:

Ant wrote:

My current view on it all is thus. Keeping the signal together as much as possible and use as few components as possible will result in a more musical and enjoyable sound.

excellent

Always a good idea to read the foreword to any book.

Sign of good things to come eh

A small sign yes

Oh and as for the other thing, the plan remains the same.

 

[Matt J]

on a similar note, what are the benefits of bi-amping? and are they massive or slight? also can someone explain "active"

My brief grasp is that is an amp for each frequency on each speaker? is that correct? how do you split the signal and how do the speakers cope with this?

Cheers

 

[Ant]

Matt J wrote:

on a similar note, what are the benefits of bi-amping? and are they massive or slight? also can someone explain "active"

My brief grasp is that is an amp for each frequency on each speaker? is that correct? how do you split the signal and how do the speakers cope with this?

Cheers

Bi-ampings benefits are supposed to be more power supply and power, which gives better control of the speakers. Better seperation and the treble/mids being less affected by large dynamic swings in the bass.All this is true but in my experience damages the enjoyment factor.

Active is getting rid of the crossover that is between the amp and the drivers and replacing it with one that sits before the amps and has an amp per driver.

The benefits are just better sound, the trouble is most people buy an off the shelf electronic crossover which I feel is not as good as building a passive crossover into the front end of the amp. This results in far less components and thus a purer signal path.

I'd love to do this but the cost is prohibitive to me.

 

[Matt J]

thanks for that, I've not seen many hi-fi makers offer products aimed at active setups, bar naim and linn, is this because of the cost or other reasons?

 

[9designs]

Ant wrote:

Matt J wrote:

on a similar note, what are the benefits of bi-amping? and are they massive or slight? also can someone explain "active"

My brief grasp is that is an amp for each frequency on each speaker? is that correct? how do you split the signal and how do the speakers cope with this?

Cheers

Bi-ampings benefits are supposed to be more power supply and power, which gives better control of the speakers. Better seperation and the treble/mids being less affected by large dynamic swings in the bass.All this is true but in my experience damages the enjoyment factor.

Active is getting rid of the crossover that is between the amp and the drivers and replacing it with one that sits before the amps and has an amp per driver.

The benefits are just better sound, the trouble is most people buy an off the shelf electronic crossover which I feel is not as good as building a passive crossover into the front end of the amp. This results in far less components and thus a purer signal path.

I'd love to do this but the cost is prohibitive to me.

If you accept going the LINN route, then Active is easy, as it's all "Plug and Play" with active cards slotting into there power amps, and designed for each speaker, and makes a major improvement,well worth the extra cost....

Bi-amping is really a stepping stone to going active with matched amps.... If that's not possible get one better amp.....

Mixing Linn amps is meant to be possible, and you can, but it does drag the sound of the better amp down... but is a convenient way to upgrade until they are all matched.....once you converted to active, you never want to go back

 

[Injector]

Cloth-Ears wrote:

If you are thinking of bi-amping, I suggest getting the second power amp second hand, otherwise you should maybe think about a bigger and better amp in a more fundamental way. There is no way I would have paid the new price to bi-amp. No way. Add to that the cost of the connectors and you really have to ask yourself, would the money not be better spent.

Like on a quad bike or summat? I tried bi-amping a few years ago and you're right Clothy, better to spend the money on one better amp. Two mediocre amps or one good amp? I know where my money would go, it's the same with bi-wiring - better to have one run ofhigher quality wire.Bi-amping does work but it's cost prohibitive IMO, you can always spend that cash elsewhere for more dramatic gains.

 

[Steve]

Replace the Classik with a dedicatedLinn preamp and you'll realy hear what the power amp is capable of.

I'm using a Linn Majik CD player into Densen B200/300XS pre/power. A few years ago I used to biamp with a Densen B100 integrated and a B300 power amp. When I swapped the integrated for the preamp it was a no-brainer improvement - bigger, ballsier, more dynamic, more detail, more fun.

 

[griffo104]

9designs wrote:

once you converted to active, you never want to go back

Absolutey.

I've had my active Linn system for about 7 years now - and I really wouldn't swap it for much else. It just does what I want so well, returning to passive systems always seem to have something missing.

It is a great shame Linn killed of the LK series - of which I've got 4 boxes - it was attractive, imo, and sounded good - no nonsense just good music playing and didn't highlight the bad things in records so was perfect for me.

 

[dudywoxer]

After reading through all the above, I have found that Monoblocks do work, I went from a rega Cursa / Maia to the same cursa plus 2 x exons, and the extra grip and control really does show though. OK the Exons are better amps than the maia anyway, so I suppose I'm getting advantages in both ways.

It would be interesting at some point to compare (with the right speakers) Bi-amping with monoblocks- (is that quad amping?) with straight monoblocks. Don't think I would want the leccy bill long term though.