Monoblocks?

[Lekidbongo]

Hi

If a Monoblock is exactly the same specification as a stereo power amplifier i.e.100WPC, other than being able to put the amp next to the speaker, what are the advantages?

If the audio power output is current limited, than how does a non-shared power supply benefit a monoblock if the total power draw is limited?

Any enlightenment is greatly appreciated.
LKB

[Firebottle]

Why would the total power draw be limited?
The output from any amplifier is limited by its internal supply voltage, plus the 'stiffness' of its supply.

It doesn't really matter if the monoblock or stereo amplifier are rated the same per channel, the supply sag when one stereo channel is driven is always going to affect the other stereo channel.
The quality of the amplifier circuit design doesn't seem to mitigate against this happening. I have recently converted both Neurochrome Modulus 86 and 286 amplifiers to true dual mono, with independent power supplies and have experienced much wider stereo imaging as a result.

[Jazid]

Intrigued Alan, as I am about to embark on a similar path but with preamps. Did you find that the separation was better than with a simple shared supply, or a shared supply with separate reservoir caps and resistors, or irrespective?

Sent from my BLA-L09 using Tapatalk

[Light Dependant Resistor]

I concur there are always sound quality improvements where mono block construction is used.
My own system uses 2 x Quad 306 where i use just one channel of each amp for each speaker.

Yes any separation of channels, or indeed separation of individual sections that see dedicated
circuitry related to the actual task is always worthwhile.

As for output power being current limited, Yes there is advantage in amplifiers being current driven rather than voltage driven.
Correctly rather than series resistance toward the loudspeaker, as a current source representing the audio output, a current driven
amplifier would have method of sensing the load, based on the requirements of the loudspeaker
https://www.stereo.net.au/forums/topic/293328-difference-among-good-solid-state-amps-regardless-of-price-and-build/page/4/?tab=comments#comment-4416252

[Bencat]

The advantages of Monobloc Amplifiers is in the main that they suffer from zero cross talk as they are fully seperated and independant . Other advantages are that one amplifier is not affected when the other has a draw on its power supply as explained in the above threads.

There is also the advantage that monoblocs can be placed very close to your speakers and connected by short speaker cables (provided you have a pre amp that can drive long phono leads) . The best cable is no cable but if it has to be there then the shortest speaker cable is the best solution (it also makes the cost of cable lower) .

I also think that all the monobloc amps I have heard have an element of control to the sound which may weel be due to the tighter grip they have on the speaker as they only have to deal with one speaker rather than two . After that I must admit I am at a loss for further advantages .

[struth]

I use amps that are mono-ed too. Mine have added advantage of a vc on each which allows me to adjust output for off centre listening as well as the other stuff mentioned

[Yomanze]

I have a "dual mono" amp. That is, two completely independent amps in one box. Would it sound different if I put a channel into another box? I doubt it...

More important is the power supply itself, rather than the box(es).

Another observation is that monoblocks tend to be at the higher end of a range, and are more likely to have bigger power supplies vs. stereo equivalents.

[Mike Reed]

I've had monobloc amps for too long to cast an opinion. My only vaguely comparable 'test' was when a friend brought round his 899 E.A.R. amp and we alternated between my E.A.R. 509s into big Quad ESLs and with E.A.R. pre-amplification. Very very similar, but more control and 'rightness' was detected by all with the mono's, and maybe a wider soundstage/imaging etc.

On another note (!) since I read somewhere that these audio items should be called 'monoblocs' rather than 'monoblocks' (and it gave a reason which currently escapes me), I've omitted the 'k'. I noticed above that BENCAT has done likewise, and it's rare to come across this.

Anybody know what and why the correct terminology is? Pedantry, maybe, but surely there can only be one spelling.

[struth]

both mean the same... think the french use the c

[anthonyTD]

:)
I've had monobloc amps for too long to cast an opinion. My only vaguely comparable 'test' was when a friend brought round his 899 E.A.R. amp and we alternated between my E.A.R. 509s into big Quad ESLs and with E.A.R. pre-amplification. Very very similar, but more control and 'rightness' was detected by all with the mono's, and maybe a wider soundstage/imaging etc.

[RMutt]

Odd really because bloc on its own means a group or alliance like for example the Eastern Bloc. Mono obviously means one. Two contradictory words put together. Has anyone ever made monobloc pre amplifiers?

[Yomanze]

Odd really because bloc on its own means a group or alliance like for example the Eastern Bloc. Mono obviously means one. Two contradictory words put together. Has anyone ever made monobloc pre amplifiers?

Two box preamps tend to have the PSU in one box, and the preamp in another.

...would be a ballache to control switching and volume for a start!

The 47lab Gaincard is mono pre and power though, albeit one chassis.

[Jac Hawk]

I've read this thread with interest as i am myself looking at a new amp or amps as it could eventually be. I get why you would split each channel to cut down on switching, but what has always baffled me is that some people keep the monoblocks central and use short inter connect cable, while others do the opposite, is there a "best" way to wire these suckers up?

[struth]

short speaker cable is way to go

[Jac Hawk]

short speaker cable is way to go

Yes but why???

[struth]

good question and im sure there will be plenty who disagree, but i feel that if you keep resistive losses in speaker cable to a mimimum it works better as long as the interconnects are not going to be silly long. Speaker cables handle a lot of current at times.

[Pharos]

Grant that is established science, but not to the extremes some claim; Damp. Fact. 1600 is ridiculous.

[struth]

Grant that is established science, but not to the extremes some claim; Damp. Fact. 1600 is ridiculous.

yup but ive seen arguements to contrary too.. bottom line is if the distances are not very big it is unlikely to make a big difference as long as the cables used are suitable for job

[Jac Hawk]

:scratch::scratch:so clear as mud then.:lol::lol:

[Mike Reed]

Odd really because bloc on its own means a group or alliance like for example the Eastern Bloc. Mono obviously means one.

Precisely, and 'block' represents a brick-like or tightly congealed mass (blockage is a derivation). By this thinking, it should be 'monoblock', but as Grant mentions on p 1, in France (and presumably elsewhere in Euroland and beyond), it's without the 'k' because the termination 'ck' is, a.f.a.I.k., not a common factor in other languages.

Even though I've used 'bloc' for years, I think the evidence points to 'block'. Ho hum!

[Mike Reed]

short speaker cable is way to go

This doesn't hold for some older Naim amplification, but logical though it may sound for other kit, I wonder if this would be applicable to all amplifier-speaker combinations (apart from said C/B and Olive Naim).

I've always had my amplification with my other kit at the other end of my rooms where the speakers are, partly because I like it all within reach and partly because there's generally no spare and safe space to put the amplifier(s) near the speakers.

I have 11 metre runs under the concrete floor but simply I/Cs to connect pre & powers. If I were to run 11 m of I/C to the (ESL) speaker based amps, it would cost a small fortune to equal the quality of the I/C to that of the (NAC A5) speaker leads. As my ESLs are energised, I can't quite get my head around any potential gains or losses which may accrue. It would certainly be a p.i.t.a. to slide a flexible I/C through two lengths of trunking (2 for the r/h speaker).

Swings and roundabouts, maybe, or definite potential gains? My brain hurts.

[struth]

Will always be amps and speakers that don't fit in. Naim stuff is an example I guess.
11 metres is a long way for interconnects. I doubt in your case it would produce anything better.

[CageyH]

I use a pure silver cable between my pre and monos. Funnily enough, they are sat very close together to each other.

[Barry]

I use two monoblock amplifiers, each located directly behind the respective speaker, so the speaker cables are less than a metre long. The amplifiers have a balanced input and are fed by 15m lengths of balanced-line cable running under the floor back to the preamp, which itself has a true dual differential output and is of dual-mono construction using separate power supplies for each channel.

Speaker cables need to have a low resistance so as to maintain a high damping factor, to absorb the back emf generated by the speaker. They also need to, at times, carry a heavy current - so ideally short thick cables are required. However with most electrostatic speakers the diaphragm has a very low mass, so there is less mass to dampen. In general, regardless of speaker type, a true damping factor (that is, taking the speaker cable loop resistance into account) of 40 - 50 is quite sufficient.

To be honest, I don't think there has been much improvement over the previous arrangement using short interconnects and long speaker cables, but I do use electrostatic speakers.

[Audio Al]

short speaker cable is way to go

If you use long cables the sound may get bored and stop for a fag :smoking: and a coffee :)

[struth]

I use two monoblock amplifiers, each located directly behind the respective speaker, so the speaker cables are less than a metre long. The amplifiers have a balanced input and are fed by 15m lengths of balanced-line cable running under the floor back to the preamp, which itself has a true dual differential output and is of dual-mono construction using separate power supplies for each channel.

Speaker cables need to have a low resistance so as to maintain a high damping factor, to absorb the back emf generated by the speaker. They also need to, at times, carry a heavy current - so ideally short thick cables are required. However most with electrostatic speakers the diaphragm has a very low mass, so there is less mass to dampen.

To be honest, I don't think there has been much improvement over the previous arrangement using short interconnects and long speaker cables, but I do use electrostatic speakers.Yup, electro s won't matter so much but it's neater. Your fine with 15m as your also using balanced gear. I was going to move mine and try a 10m run of rca's but tbh I can't be bothered as it's sounding rather good as is

[Mike Reed]

I use a pure silver cable between my pre and monos. Funnily enough, they are sat very close together to each other.

So did I, and may do again. The difference between Artisan Audio (?) 8 core silver I/C and Chord Indigo (or Signature) is marked, with the silver bringing out the crispness/detail. Swings and roundabouts, though, as the copper I/Cs are more rounded in a musical sense. Should try my T.Q. Black Diamond, as Heaven knows what they're made of. I find experimenting, even at this basic level, tedious nowadays as it gets in the way of listening, so I usually reserve 'tweaking' until I have a bake-off and collate opinions.

[Mike Reed]

If you use long cables the sound may get bored and stop for a coffee :)

That's definitely grounds for complaint !