System too bassy - Primaluna & Usher

Ok I think I got it. So the only terminal that will have more then one wire would be the 0 terminal at back of amp. Correct?

Ok I think I got it. So the only terminal that will have more then one wire would be the 0 terminal at back of amp. Correct?

Yes!

To be sure it's clear, let's just consider the situation where you are NOT using cables that are specifically intended for biwiring. You would have four ordinary speaker cables, two for each channel.

On each channel, one wire of one of those two cables would connect the - (0 ohm) amp terminal to the speaker's - low frequency terminal. The other wire of that same cable would connect the 4 ohm amp terminal to the speaker's + low frequency terminal.

One wire of the other of those two cables would connect the same - amp terminal to the speaker's - high frequency terminal. The other wire of that cable would connect the 8 ohm amp terminal to the speaker's + high frequency terminal.

Alternatively, the same thing could be accomplished with biwire cables, which would provide 4 wires in the cable for each channel, but ONLY if it were the kind of biwire cable that provides 4 independent connections at both ends (rather than just providing 2 connections at the amp end, as many of them do).

BE SURE to remove the jumpers on the back of the speaker that connect the low and high frequency terminals to each other, when and if you try this. I don't think any damage would occur if you failed to do this, but the sonic results would not be as intended.

Regards,
-- Al

Al - thanks again. So my issue is that my amp terminals are banana so how can I put 2wires into the 0ohm terminal?

AL - I was looking at some speaker cables that were " bi-wired". They were one set of cable with one end having the normal - & + ends and the other being bi-wired, having the 4 ends. This would not be utilizing the advantages of what you're suggesting (as far as I'm understanding). Please let me know how I can put two wires in the 0 ohm terminal. Only thing I can think of is if I take out the banana plug and twist the other wire into it and then put back the banana plug. IS this what I'm supposed to do?

Sorry for the ignorance, this is all new to me. I don't want to ruin any of this equipment.

Al - I just had some time to re-read all of your comments and looking at the figure 1 link you posted. Wow! Thank you so much for looking into this. I'm floored at how much knowledge you have on this. It took me a bit to understand it even a bit. It makes a lot of sense. I'm excited to try this. Just waiting for an answer on how to actually put two wires into 0ohm. Maybe its just as simple as I think. Waiting to hear back. Thanks again !!

O, I am already using the 4ohm in my current setup. Does that mean it won't help the bass issue? Or will it still help because the low impedence power will be more focused on the lower frequency instead of shared with the highs? Also, will this put more stress on my amp, making it put out power from both? Anything to be concerned about?

I was looking at some speaker cables that were " bi-wired". They were one set of cable with one end having the normal - & + ends and the other being bi-wired, having the 4 ends. This would not be utilizing the advantages of what you're suggesting (as far as I'm understanding).

Correct. As I mentioned earlier, you need 4 independent connections at each end.

I am already using the 4ohm in my current setup. Does that mean it won't help the bass issue? Or will it still help because the low impedence power will be more focused on the lower frequency instead of shared with the highs? Also, will this put more stress on my amp, making it put out power from both? Anything to be concerned about?

Given the impedance characteristics of your particular speakers, changing from having both sections of the speaker driven from the 4 ohm tap to having its low frequency section driven from the 4 ohm tap and its high frequency section driven from the 8 ohm tap will alter the overall frequency balance in the direction you want.

Obviously there are no guarantees as to how much of a difference it will make, considering the other factors that are contributing, and there are no guarantees that it won't have some unpredictable sonic downsides. But it seems to me to be well worth trying.

You won't overstress the amp by doing this, or cause any other problems I can foresee. As I'm sure you realize everything should be turned off when connections are being worked with, and obviously you should make sure that any connections to adjacent terminals are not in contact with each other. Also, a tube amp should not be operated without a speaker being connected to it.

Please let me know how I can put two wires in the 0 ohm terminal. Only thing I can think of is if I take out the banana plug and twist the other wire into it and then put back the banana plug.

You can probably judge that better than I can, based on the physical dimensions that are involved. But a good approach that would appear certain to work would be to use a banana plug such as this one, which can accept up to an 8 gauge (VERY thick) wire into its rear opening, and up to a 12 gauge wire into its side opening (or perhaps vice versa; it looks like the description may have an error). (Keep in mind that the lower the gauge number, the thicker the wire).

You would want to have a wire stripper to be able to strip off the insulation cleanly, something like this.

Some of the other listings here might provide additional possibilities.

Good luck! Regards,
-- Al

Pics! Thank you thank you. View the 2 pics in this link that show how I've set it up for one speaker so far. I'm going to get back to it for the second. Let me know if this is what you're talking about.

https://www.dropbox.com/home/Set%20up

PS. I was actually using the 8ohm setting the whole time so even more chance of improvement now.
I was able to fit 2 wires in the 0ohm banana plug. Also, I'm just using some standard wire that I had lying around to try this. I kept the slightly better cable for the low frequency and used the standard for the highs.

Deetothevee, the link in your last post requires a Dropbox signin. It apparently needs to be done differently for the pix to be visible to the general public.

Regards,
-- Al

RESULTS! I'm very happy (although maybe too soon) that I can report very significant improvements jn bass control and articulation! I want to give it time to prove that I'm not just hearing things but I have it a little louder then normal and I hear a more balanced sound. I did exactly what Al recommended with bi-wiring. Took some work but was very worth it. Wow I'm listening now and am floored at how much more balanced my sound is. Wow!! Thank you so much everyone and especially Al for supporting me and going way above and beyond. I've learned a ton.

You guys are incredible. I'll keep you posted after more listening time.

Brilliant, AL. Looking at the impedance curve, your solution makes so much sense.

Nice. Impedance matters!

Ya it's sounding good my friends! I'm thinking of which speaker cables to get for each frequency range. Would it make sense to go for a "lean and tight" cable for low frequency and a sweet high frequency cable for the highs. In other words ask myself what I want most out of the two frequencies. Or would you guys recommend using the same cable for both ?

I'd use the same wire for both myself at this stage jut because that will keep things simpler. You can always experiment with whatever variations you want from there later.

I think what makes sense right now is to get used to this new sound. Then consider my next option. What I've noticed so far is that the bass issue has been removed at the 9 o'clock volume position and only starts to become a problem at nearly the 10 o'clock position. Which in my room is quite loud. So this has definitely improved my bass issue and I feel confident that I can manage this issue with a few more tweaks. Id love to try room accoustics as I think it is a must for any situation but I can't do that just yet because I'm unclear with my living situation. So I think a rca interconnect might be the next thing to consider.

Glad I was able to help. One more thing to try, if you haven't already, would be running the amp in triode mode, rather than ultralinear mode (which according to the manual the amp automatically defaults to when turned on). I don't know if with your particular speakers and setup triode mode would produce results that are better, worse, or just different than ultralinear (although I'd certainly expect the results to be different), but it's something that's easy enough to try. The manual indicates that the mode can be switched via the remote control.

When you do that, keep in mind that the power capability of the amp in triode mode is just 18 watts, compared to 36 watts in ultralinear mode (although that is just a 3 db difference; not a large amount subjectively). So on material containing high volume peaks, especially in the bass region, be careful not to turn the volume control up beyond the point where distortion starts to become obvious. That would signify the onset of clipping (i.e., the point where the amp is being asked to deliver more power than it is capable of). Severely clipped waveforms, which will sound very distorted, can damage speakers.

Also, although the manual doesn't say this, IMO it would be prudent to not change between the two modes while music is playing.

Regards,
-- Al

Al, FWI you can change modes on the fly without risk so A/B comparisons are easy. The difference is that in triode mode the top end is rolled and the mid-range is somewhat sweeter. You can hear the decrease in power output. The change is not so much different from other amps with mode switching, IME. And I doubt that this will solve any of the OP's issues with the bass, although it will make edgy recordings far more listenable.

11-10-13: Newbee
Al, FWI you can change modes on the fly without risk so A/B comparisons are easy.

Thanks, Newbee. Since the design of your amp has a lot of commonality with the design of the OP's, I'll defer to your comment.

Best regards,
-- Al

I've played a lot with the different modes since I've had the amp. I've always loved the triode mode. The linear mode does help the bass issues a bit. But not enough. I've used the triode mode as the benchmark for each tweak I've made so far (speaker positioning and bi wiring). I still check how it affects linear mode but my goal is to get to a happy place with triode. Plus since the bass issue is slightly worse in triode it was a better place to start notice improvements as my discernment skills are developing.

The other thing that has been changed before I made the biwire tweak is the tubes. They are now el34 wc (svetlana) compared to the stock Primaluna el34's. They came with my purchase of the amp so I'm not sure if they are broken in yet. I assumed they were but I should check into that because that would make things confusing ;). But I do know that the changes from biwiring were immediate and impressive regardless.

One thing that I toyed with before the biwiring was my itunes equalizer. It definitely reduced bloatness in the bass. I'm no expert, but it doesn't feel right to have all this effort and money in a hifi setup and only to lower frequency responses on an EQ which alters an artists intentions. As I heard "less bass" it was satisfying at first but then I realize that I've, in some cases, eliminated sounds of a piece so that it could be appropriate to my rig and environment. Is my thinking correct? Or is this what I'm essentially doing when I make tweaks to achieve my current goals? I think this gets into the philosophy of it all so would love your opinions on EQ.

11-10-13: Deetothevee
But I do know that the changes from biwiring were immediate and impressive ....

To be sure it's clear to others who may read this, as I see it the improvement was almost certainly due mainly to the use of different amplifier taps for the low and high frequency sections of the speaker (which in turn was made possible by biwiring), not to biwiring in itself.

One thing that I toyed with before the biwiring was my itunes equalizer. It definitely reduced bloatness in the bass. I'm no expert, but it doesn't feel right to have all this effort and money in a hifi setup and only to lower frequency responses on an EQ which alters an artists intentions. As I heard "less bass" it was satisfying at first but then I realize that I've, in some cases, eliminated sounds of a piece so that it could be appropriate to my rig and environment. Is my thinking correct? Or is this what I'm essentially doing when I make tweaks to achieve my current goals? I think this gets into the philosophy of it all so would love your opinions on EQ.

Good question. Unfortunately I don't think that there is a general purpose answer, as there are many variables involved. Including differences in the quality of the equalization function, and the fact that on many and perhaps most recordings the artist's intent is already compromised by less than optimal mic'ing, mixing, overprocessing, and generally poor engineering. And there usually tends to be a tradeoff between making the (sonically) best recordings sound their best, and making average recordings sound as good as possible.

Also, IMO/IME introducing equalization into the signal path, if it is not implemented to a very high standard, can easily have downsides (such as loss of clarity and definition) that outweigh the benefits.

FWIW, my own philosophy is that in general the less processing that is introduced into the signal path the better. And if that means that mediocre recordings are reproduced "warts and all," or that acoustic anomalies in the room or system can't be addressed in a convenient and inexpensive manner, so be it. Although I have an open (and intrigued) mind with respect to some of the relatively recent developments in DSP (digital signal processing)-based room correction products, such as the DSPeaker Anti-Mode 2.0 Dual Core (around $1100), and (at vastly higher price points) the Trinnov products.

IMO.

Best regards,
-- Al

So glad you caught my lack of clarity on what we really did with the wiring. I've never heard of or thought of putting 2 ground (-) wires in the 0ohm terminal. So your right, it's what we did with the wires that made the difference. I'm still thrilled about what we did. Unconventional, clever and resourceful. I didn't spend a dime (I had some extra cheap cable wire lying around) and I'm not adding any "tone control" tweaks like interconnects that are known for being "lean" (not that I'm against that, I'm still going to do that if it's still needed). I'd say that this tweak was the best one to make at this point, other then room acoustics. But even then, I can't think of any reason why I wouldn't want to properly allocate the amps ohm output.

In regards to EQ, I completely agree with Al. All of our ideals in the chain are just that - our made up ideals. The fact is that before we even decide on which song to play there have already been endless, less then ideal breaks in the "ideal" chain (ie the recording process). I played with the idea of trying to keep everything neutral for the sake of hi fi and all that. But I realized that who cares? It's your sound, your music. If you like boomy bass, work towards more boomy bass. If you like unnatural "sparkliness", then go for it. If you want to hear the recording completely as it is, then go for complete neutrality. For me, I'd rather enjoy (based on my personal tastes) my music that I enjoy, not dependant on how well the recording was. I have no control over how they recorded but I do have control over my setup and making it sound as I like.