Basic electrical questions.

RE Another breaker box?

No. Well, not necessarily. Depends on the breakers actual physical nlayout. are there any blank (unused) spaces? If so your job will be much easier. Also the actual width of standard breakers (if used) allows for some hidden growth by using half sized breakers. Though physiccally half the size they'll carry the same current load and work as effectively.

Standard size is about 1/2 inch across. There are half size breakers called waffer breakers. By removing the standard sized one and inserting two half size ones, you'll gain one additional circuit. Remove two std, and gain two ckts using four waffers.

The main consideration here is this... the current load of the breaker box. Usually there are blanks (unused) spaces in any new installation put there for growth such as this desire. Adding a couple 20a breakers there in std size might be OK. provided there are blanks preexisting. otherwise the choice is this... a sub panel as was said, or the use of waffers.

I can't actually for true tell you that adding a couple half size breakers to gain two added ckts is safe, or right for your situation. I'd need to be there for that... so call one of your electrican friends to come over and have a look first.

I've done it myself in other homes though without issue... BUT TO BE SAFE AND SURE... SEEK OUT A QUALIFIED LOCAL SPARKY TO TAKE A LOOK SEE FIRST.

Where the waffers, if used, are placed (which phase) is a little important too. I had mine put on the lighting phase, instead of on the side supplying all the appliances. As well and if possible placing the new ckts closest to the incoming feed to the panel (top or bottom, depending on the panel) will help too. marginally in some cases, more so in others. Depends on the adjacent ckts.

usually, 'Sparkies' will say it doesn't matter, by and large.

Were I to add a sub panel I would also add an isolation transformer supplying that newest panel too. There are transformers which will also condition better the power incoming and passing thru it as well as isolation from the rest of the household effects.

Lastly, when ya add these new receptacles - ckts, think about adding four outlets to each vs. two, on one or both of the new lines. One never knows what one might need later.

Call an electrician first, in any event.... even if you wind up doing the work yourself.

Thanks for your response. I have lots of info to share with my sparky!

12-09-08: Almarg
Can someone offer either a technical explanation, or at least some persuasive anecdotal evidence, to explain the claim that running multiple dedicated lines to the different components of a single system is beneficial.

Almarg,
Check out page 4. The Ac Power Line and Audio Equipment. Part 2

Digital equipment is the worst. Separate dedicated lines helps decouple the power supplies of audio equipment from one another.

If you search the archives over on AA you will find EEs that discuss the technical benefits of separate dedicated circuits for analog and digital equipment.
.

Jea48 -- That was an excellent paper; thanks!

However, it does not really address my question, which as you appear to realize was about having MULTIPLE dedicated lines powering different parts of the same audio system. The author describes his own setup, which has a single dedicated line running to a receptacle into which he plugs a diy power strip + switch. He does provide some good information as to connection order, such as connecting the power amp to the end of the strip closest to the incoming ac.

I understand your point about decoupling the power supplies of each component from the supplies of the other components, particularly to isolate digital components from analog components. But I'm uncertain how to reconcile that with the concerns I expressed, about ground loops and the possibility of having ac ground points that are offset from each other at least at high frequencies.

When I get a chance I'll try to take a look at the AA archives you mentioned.

Thanks again,
-- Al

I'm mostly with Al on this one. The paper that Jea48 refers to is interesting and has some valid information, but there are also some typos and mistakes . . . and I think that some of his conclusions are a little questionable. With ANY of the Audio Express, Audio Amateur, Glass Audio, etc. articles, I HIGHLY recommend also reading follow-ups in the "letters" section of the following issue(s), as there is frequently a bit of ongoing dialogue. I definately would NOT just take them as gospel, simply because they're published in an audio magazine.

But there are cases, esp. with multiple high-powered amplifiers, that I can see some benefit to having multiple circuits run. But if all of the issues that Al mentions aren't taken into account when the circuits are wired, then it will likely make things worse.

In professional sound, lighting, and video, multiple circuits and distros are usually required simply to provide anywhere near enough current . . . not to mention a combination of house and generator power. This is also usually the main portal a grizzly parallel dimension of horrific shocks, sparks, and humm that knows no ends . . . so for a domestic system of modest power requirements, a single dedicated circuit avoids a LOT of pitfalls.