Passive biamping question

Maybe this info can help you make a decision. Currently, I'm doing a vertical biamp in my own system. I'm very happy with the results. To be honest, I've never heard of any negative downsides to doing it this way. But after reading Kr4's post, I think that some caution may be necessary. It's entirely possible that it may not work the same for everyone. The main idea behind a vert biamp it to use work both amps the same amount (basically what I said in my first post.). I don't see how you can have any negative effects doing this way, but that doesn't make me right.

Based on that, I would find a way to demo a vert biamp system with the components you are going to buy. Also, the components in my system are known to sound very good when configured this way. (2 Ayre v5's powering Vandersteen 2's.)

All true but, if you consider the audible effect of a 3dB increase, it is nearly inconsequential.

Assuming the amp is not bridgeable of course.

True, but 3db is still the difference between 150 and 300w, 200 and 400, etc. Say, you have an amp that you really like but want new speakers that are less efficient, rather than sell the amp, you could buy another amp exactly the same, new or used, and it could be very cost effective.

1. Vertical and horizontal biamping are two ways of connecting the amps but both are passive biamping if they are not implemented with an external active network before the amps and with the internal crossover removed/bypassed.

2. It depends on the music, of course, and that division is certainly possible. However, the power distribution is much more skewed to the bass in most cases. In addition, not everyone's crossover fits the bill.

3. However, it is still hard to see how "beneficial" it can be. Even if it was 50:50 power distribution at the user's low/mid crossover, the absolute maximum effective power increase one could realize would be 3db, the same as you would achieve with a single amp of double your present power. I see no other advantage with a passive arrangement.

4. OTOH, unless you miswire it, there is no downside to biamping and those who are intrigued by it should simply try it for themselves.

On further research, it seems that the spectral distibution of music is around a 50-50 split around 250hz, and for a three way system, that is close to where the crossover would be between midrange and woofer. So I'm thinking it could be beneficial.

Kr4

Sorry, but I just noticed your last comment. I'm not sure what you mean. Are you saying passive biamping is what I'm calling vertical biamping?

That is passive biamping and any improvements in "quality" are debatable.

I'm not sure what you mean by passive biamping. You won't double your power by using 2 channels for each speaker; each channel is still 100 watts. You are, however, in a position to increase you sound quality if you do a vertical biamp. You can do that by running the signal from your preamp to the inputs on a pair of channels that share the same power supply. Then take the left and right signal from those 2 channels and plug them both in to one of your speakers. One speaker cable goes to the highs and the other to the lows on you binding posts. Do the exact same thing for the other channel.

No. The spectral distribution of power in music signals is heavily weighted towards the bass. As a result, the total output is limited by the bass amp which will still be 100w. There is quite limited increase in power capability. (And 200w would only be 3dB anyway.)