using different amps for Bi-amping ,any good ?? l

Hi Simon, I have heard biamped setups that did not have the problems you describe. In particular I would not expect less coherence across the midrange ; rather the contrary.

I think biamping is definitely worth considering. My very humble opinion though, is that it is not worth considering as a priority until you have reached a very high level of performance with conventional amplification. I feel you can do more for less money at an early stage by simply upgrading a two-channel amp. Since biamping means doubling the cost of your amp, consider it this way : how much better a power amp could I get for twice the retail price of my present amp?

I have also heard biamped setups using dissimilar amplification--solid state on the bass and tubes for the treble--so I know it can be done. The guys had worked for months and months on the sound, tweaking crossovers, reworking the amp designs... if you are ready for this kind of fun, that's great.

I think passive biamping with dissimilar amps has enormous potential for disaster.

Forgive me if you have heard this comment from me before.

Biamping, using a low level crossover, made a lot of sense back in the days when 15 watt power amps were common, 25 watts considered overkill, and IM distortion was one percent or more in the very best equipment.

Today, except for ProSound rigs where thousands of watts are required, the only real advantage of biamping is the elimination of passive crossovers. In the case of subwoofer crossovers, 100 Hz or lower, an active low level crossover and biamping is almost manditory, because the required values of inductors and capacitors for a passive crossover would be very expensive. The case for biamping at higher crossover frequencies is not so strong, although some (like Sean) swear by it.

Another factor, for subwoofers, is that a specialized LF amp can be used. All the audiophile characteristics like "transparency", "air" etc apply to HF amps. Quite inexpensive "plate" SW amps work well.

Hi,Tobias. Pardon me, I was referring B-wiring (NOT Bi-amping)would reproduce less/meaner Bass ,some said the sound is not as coherent as with Single-wiring .
Just wonder does anybody have such negative/or other negative on Bi-WIRING ?

Simon

Biwiring works well on some speakers, and by reports it does not work well for others. My own experience includes the AR2ax and the Meadowlark Shearwater Hot Rod.

The AR model was introduced long before biwiring became popular, so it is a safe bet that its crossover was not specifically designed with biwiring in mind. Nevertheless it sounded better to me when biwired. Highs became clearer and bass did not suffer.

The Meadowlark Shearwater's crossover was designed for biwiring. The manufacturer recommends you run it that way and that's how it sounds best to me.

Other people have had negative experiences with biwiring; try searching the archives here and at Audio Asylum. I guess you just have to try it with your speakers and amp.

I think biwiring is system dependent. I use all Linn gear myself, which is made with the intention of upgrading: bi-wiring, then multi-amping passive, then multi-amping active. When I took a pair of single wired Linn speakers and bi-wired, I noticed an immediate improvement. It wasn't great but it was noticeable. The cliche that reviewers use about "lifting a veil" applied. When I passively bi-amped, I also noticed a difference. Again, it wasn't great, but noticeable. Better bass, and background detail improved. For bi-amping passively. the improvement was not so great. I don't know if it was a particularly cost effective upgrade. I think that one good amp will outperform two mediocre amps. However, if you go active, that's a significant upgrade. I would regard passive bi-amping only as an intermediary step towards going active. As noted above, if you are not going active, it might be better to invest in a single better amp, rather than passively bi-amping with two mediocre amps.