2. speakers
  3. 130092-88016

If bi-amping is so great, why do some high end speakers not support it?

I’m sure a number of you have much more technical knowledge than I. so I’m wondering: a lot of people stress the value of bi-amping. My speakers (B&W CM9, and Monitor Audio PL100II) both offer the option. I use it on the Monitors, and I think it helps.

But I’ve noticed many speakers upward of $5k, and some more than $50k (e.g., some of Magico) aren’t set up for it.

Am I missing something? Or is this just one of the issues on which there are very different opinions with no way to settle the disagreement?

Thanks folks…


rsgottlieb
kdude66
1,200 posts
 
Alan,

I could see benefits with that pairing in a biamp configuration,

I haven't owned Maggie's for about 7 yrs and the speakers from then to now would'nt have benefited a biamp configuration,all high efficiency.

Now when you bring up the configuration of active biamping and not using the passive crossovers in a speaker that's a completely different way to go and without question is a game changer.But with greater cost and complexity.


Kenny.
kr4's avatar
kr4
3,720 posts
 
Groundhog day.
randy-11
1,913 posts
 
arh - the 3.7i's are worth the upgrade

AND the crossover is now very good - no biamping needed (or allowed)
chrisr's avatar
chrisr
543 posts
 
Because bi-amping is not as good as two big monoblocks.
arh
366 posts
 
If I bought 3.7i I could not Bi-amp. That is why I keep my 3.6's If I did buy 3.7i's I would use my Bernings as mono blocks.No pans to do so
Alan
More to discover