Bridge or bi-amp? Which should I do?

I would also biamp. I am not sure that NAD amplifiers like to be bridged. Happy listening

I once talked to the folks at Bryston about bridging their amps verses upgrading to higher wattage. They said that when you bridge their amps while you get more raw power, you give up some of the quality of sound (i.e. soundstage, etc.). If that's true of a Bryston amp which is very 'bridging friendly', I wonder if it's not true of most all amps that a person would bridge. I am not an engineer but I followed their advice and went with the higher wattage amp instead of the bridging route. If I were you, I would bi-amp as well.

I recently sold my NAD 2400 and purchased the new NAD C270 amp. I have the integrated C370. Should I bi-amp my speakers or bridge the two amps?

There is a very good discussion of some of the benefits of bi-amping at www.sound.au.com if you are not alreaady familiar with it. (Rod Elliot's site.)

The issue of good sound is always a quest. For this reason, the audiophile is engaged in an activity not unlike that of a dog trying to bite its tail. Never ends.

My dear friend, why bother? Those components of yours will not take you far. Harshness, harmonic artifacts, lack of proper soundstage and sheer frustration will be sitting next to you in your listening room. Simplicity is of utmost importance regarding your issue. Integrated is simply not the way. Even in hoods this is a well known fact among the rappers. Why, then, do you even bother to complicate your life? Listen and learn, listen and be wise; now you won't be able to sell your gear even in the hood...

An old classic tube receiver, some loaded horn speakers and a good self powered sub will save you headaches. Will beat the crap out of what you have. Just post this thread in Audioasylum and wait for the fish to bite.

Listen and be wise...