Am I wasting money on the theory of Bi-amping?

The very basics: a [speaker] passive crossover comes AFTER the amps, operating at speaker level.  The drivers are connected to the crossover not the amplifiers; active crossover /electronic crossovers come BEFORE the amps, operating typically at [balanced] line level; the drivers are individually and directly connected to a specific amp channel that is for that driver and that driver alone.  

It is hard to understand how anyone could think shoving a bunch of passive electronics with lots and lots of wire into an audio chain between the amplifiers and drivers could be a step up in quality and create a better, more pristine audio chain.  I wonder if passive fans realize how much wire is in an air core inductor used in a high quality passive crossover (300-500 feet or more?).  We don't do any other processing after amplifiers, why is the passive crossover somehow an exception?       

There is so much science here that is quite established and well accepted, since the 60s-70s at least.  ATC and Genelec were offering full [analog] active crossover loudspeakers to the market in the early 80s, some with internal amps, some with external amps.  Both companies sold into home and pro simultaneously.  Now there are many more companies offering active crossover speakers and some use DSP, some still analog.  

There are plenty of options and choices as to how one can approach this active issue and adapt it to your liking, make it sound one way or another.  It does require some work to understand what is happening, but its certainly not complicated.  It is not more expensive or more difficult to operate.     

I cannot help but observe the entire "passive crossover is better" argument appears to be a clear example of marketing not science.   

Brad

^While active crossovers could certainly have advantages. Where as passive crossovers often have implementations to compensate for specific driver anomalies, impedance smoothing, phase and time considerations. Off the shelf active crossovers are typically rather clumsy in those regard, as well as potentially adding noise. Again, active crossovers can certainly have advantages. As was posted DSP could make active more finessed and practical.

@lonemountain

There are pros and cons with active, and with passive crossovers. In a perfect world, active crossovers have some distinct benefits....especially if starting up from scratch, but many of us get to the bi-amp situation once we’re already well invested in our current systems. Sometimes it just not feasible to backtrack to square one.

@unsound reiterated some of the benefits and situation need for passive crossovers. There are certainly active crossovers that can perform some, if not all, of the compensation requirements of some drivers, but what if you already own a really nice pair of speakers that you love and that have excellent, well designed passive crossovers with top shelf parts, and you want to dip your toe into bi-amping? I’d think even a serious audio buff would hesitate before proceeding to gut the crossovers from a pair of Magico, Wilson, or Sonus Faber speakers so they can experiment with active crossovers. Not everyone has the knowledge, expertise, or the will power to actually make such a bold move.....in many cases it’s simply not wise to risk the destruction of a wonderful pair of speakers to pursue an active crossover. If a great pair of speakers sounds good with passive crossovers in a single amp situation, they’re very likely to sound even better with a good bi-amp setup, even with the passive crossovers.

Passive or active bi-amping should not be undertaken without first asking the manufacturer’s advice.

See article below:

Mike

Making the Case for Active Crossovers vs. Passive

@knotscott - yours is probably the only legit answer for not investigating active more thoroughly.  I get that once invested downa path, its difficult to change.

@unsound - comment about passive crossovers having "implmentations to compensate" for driver anomalies sounds like you think active crossovers cannot offer the same or better "compensations".  Actually this is one of the primary arguments FOR active, its much beeter to solve all these issues before the amplifier, not after.  

Why no comment about all the wire and passive components between the amplifier and driver ?   This seems to be the elephant in the room doesnt it? .