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/top...omment-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.