Is SQ adversely affected when bridging vs. simply running an amp in stereo. Lets say I had two amps, bridge them both and put one on each channel. Will there be a significant difference between that and a similarly powered 2 channel? (100 watts bridged vs. 100 watts per channel)
Pioneer DEH-80PRS - Active, JL HD 600/4 on Focal Power 165 KR2, JL HD 750/1 on JL Tundra Stealthbox 10w3v3-2, Stinger connects, JL Amp kit, Hushmat floors and doors.
nope. ussualy the difference is .01%THD vs .1%THD neither are audible.
there is no magic in bridging. you are just taking the left channel and summing it with right channel (inverted). the sum of the 2 channels gives you a theoretical 2X power than the 2 channels do by themselves. (this has to do with how it loads more than anything.) in reality you will get 1.5x-1.8x . That summing effect also magnified the THD, since you are getting both channel THD into one channel.
Original post whore!
Disclaimer:Opinions of the above are the property of the poster
Stock Sync HU |AC LC2i | Phoenix Gold EQ215i | Soundstream SA120 -> ID CD1eMH | JL 300/2 -> ID X65 | JL 500/1 -> (2) 15" Pyle PL1590BL in IB
u r going to get vastly differing opinions on this.
i have met people who swear both ways...some refuse to ever bridge due to the increase THD, though as mentioned it is doubtful that a human ear can pick it up, however, we often make other decisions based on other similar differences, perhaps the better question is if you had two amps, one is rated at 1%THD and one at .01 or .001THD, but the former is 30 percent cheaper, produces 30 percent more power. (often the case of a medium 4 channel bridged versus a big two channel)...which would you choose?
on the flipside, i know people who loves bridging because they claim better headroom and better stereo separation. of course dependant on amps as above...but thats their take when talking about quality gear.
to me, if there is a two channel of sufficient power, size and price that fits the bill, i usually use it, or better, a dual mono. but if not, i dont hesitate to bridge.
i have really yet to hear a difference..my own car for example, usea a 4 channel bridged to send 250 watts to each midbass.
i think personally, if you use top shelf gear, you will be fine with either method.
When I was competing I took my 4ch amp from running tweets and mids using internal x/o's to using the passives and bridged and on the whole everything got better simply because the head room went up. I felt that placement was better and I noticed that my tweeters didn't distort as easily because I could keep my gains lower.
In my old Civic coupe, I ran one amp bridged per door on the components run passive. I'd be willing to bet that any distortion I heard was from the speakers themselves versus the amplifier doubling in distortion by bridging. I went from 60x2 to a conservative 240x1 per door.
2012 Subaru WRX - JL Audio C5-650s run active off a Lunar L450; Digital Designs 1508 powered by a Lunar L1500; Pioneer DEH-80PRS as the source unit.
Mcintosh seem to be pretty darn good at building amps. I'm sure the amps they design and build do exatcly what they state. The question becomes does it really matter? I would guess that its all unaudiable.