Is Bi - amping worth the trouble?

Oh, I have a couple more comments: don't bridge! Bridging an amp compromises its technical performance, and I have heard the degradation. If you decide to use one stereo amp per speaker, bi-wiring the two channels separately with a Y-connector up-stream (AKA passive bi-amping) is MUCH better than bridging. To say that "its not worth it" is not in the spirit of high-end audio. We all know that more fussing and more money brings about only incremental benefits. So, if a difference is definately audible, then the reward is achieved.

I dont really see the point of biamping if you are using the same amps, I have done it and the difference was really minor, go tube for the upper range.

Yes the best Ultimate way to Biamp is to open up your speakers and pull the XOver out and wire each driver directly, remember you then have to use 3 amps, one for each driver that is woofer, mids and tweeter, wait you have two woofers there make that 4 amps! While your at it change the wire going into each driver and by the way add some blue tack to the frames of the drivers. Leave the wire long enough so you can hard wire directly to the amps terminals. Do use silver wire for mids-tweeter and copper for both woofers. You can also use different interconnects from the active XO to each amp, I would recommend Nordost for mids and tweeter amps and Siltech for the bass amps.

Of course you can start slowly and enjoy each step of the way! No other system will sound better to you.

I would start the easiest and cheapest way possible, see if I like the changes and do some more. Say get a nice tube amp, there is a new Genesis amp push-pull with 6550 tubes that I think would sound wonderful, it was designed with biamping in mind, or say a McIntosh 275 or 240 amps. and just "dual-amp biwire" it, If you like this for the amount of 2 bucks you can make a passive line level XO, which is what most gung-ho biampers recommend (check the Oris speaker website) some say first order is the best (Romy the cat). Before buying an Active Xover I would probably change the values on the tube amp coupling capacitor and resistor to avoid low freq. this would be the most purist way to do it (I have done it) you also avoid another set of ICs which is not only expensive but detrimental to sound (not to mention the damage an active Xover will bring to the system) Now for the tweeter amp the line level Xover didn’t really worked all the way up, the best thing there would be to add a cap between the tweeter and the amp (Hovland?). I would use the active Xover for the bass amps, there is where the passive original Xover does the most damage! Those huge caps and huge inductors are no good!

Be brave and do it!

If you can run Solid state on the bottom with LEVEL controls, which many do not unless running a pro audio amp than you will have difficulty matching up gain with a tube amp on top.. YES there are still benefits of running 2 of the same amps in a verticle bi-amp config, this is because you will still have dedicated Current running to just the bass drivers not sharing it with the upper end. However it can be as explained here to some more accurate degree very little advance, unless it is just the right amp speaker combo it could be substantial even in a passive crossover system. The VK 500 you have in question is a Dual mono with dedicated power supplys to each channel I believe, so Having 4 Dedicated transformers, with Hi current and Higher Capacitance per channel can be better even with the same 2 amps... Also, I totally agree that DO NOT bridge and expect better results, the Verticle bi-amping with 4 channels should prove to sound better anyway, but you could experiment both ways if you have the amps that can bridge in the first place.

Sweet jumpin' jellyfish! ...and all I thought I was going to need was another amp and a couple wires! Oh. My. God... or Gosh! for the more reserved among us.

I mean, really. that's a bunch. Can't just come out of the preamp to the X over and then to the amps and use the X over in the speakers, huh? Super. Just super. More than two amps just ain't happening sportsfans. Nope! Sorry. I'd not trust myself these days to do any fine electronical work. that's over with... I have the know how. I have the technology. but I can't rebuild the six million dollar man, eh, speaker.

If removing X overs in the speakers, is a 'MUST DO' with either method, passive, or active, I'd need farm that out.... and if THAT entailed more amps... well, see previous paragraph.

..and we're back to the "Is it worth the trouble?", thingy, once more. Sure sounds like a lot of trouble to me. Unless I can add another pair of ICs... another amp... maybe make a move in changing out my speaker cables... then I'll have to cry "Uncle!"... it's just beyond me... I'd even go so far as to add another device like an outboard X over... the consequential wires it would dictate, but then you all said that would mean gutting the present X overs in the speakers... and doing each driver in and of itself... Whoa Nelly! Sorry kids. That dog won't hunt. Unless!? well, there's that redneck retirement we got down here each week.... maybe then.

What an 'eye opener'. For real. Guess times and technology have changed greatly. I remember this aspiration as being far simpler. To wit, my aforementioned, and succintly now debunked plan. Well if two amps do wind up somehow driving my speakers, then super! If not, getting a tube abp will happen. Till then, I'm disappointed. yet in all glad to know the truth of things up front. The purist approach is out almost entirely. Gone. We'll see just how slam bang a tube amp I can come up with first... then refer to these notes one more time.

Now, you're beginning to get it.

So back to your origional question: Is it worth it?

I had a pair of power pigs and an old 100 wpc amp. It was a very strong 100 watts though but I auditioned another pair of monoblocks that were much more refined and had great imaging. Unfortunately the monoblocks didn't have nearly the bass depth and slam. No problem, just use all the amps, right?

The good part was that the bass crossover was at 90 Hz. If it was any higher, it would be more difficult because the hearing is more sensitive in the midbass.

Still, not that simple. First, the old amp was inverting. Easy fix; reverse speaker wires to bass. Then the gains didn't match so I went down to the doohicky shop and bought a 5 KOhm carbon potentiometer, a box and some female RCA's. Wired that up and twiddled for weeks. It was better but not quite right. Every time I changed the volume, I had to adjust the gain. Every CD had to dialed in. Even then, it always seemed bloated around the crossover point. Went back for a different doohicky. This time, it was a wire-wound pot. No better. Another thing that happens with multiple amps is ground loops and hum. Just another part of the learning experience.

Started looking at active crossovers and what would be involved. They ain't cheap. While I knew the crossover point, I could not find the slope of the passives in the speaker. Considering that each order (1st, 2nd...) adds 90 degrees of phase and and the speakers were designed to be coherent at one of those, I thought I should know. Turns out that wasn't relevant because active X-overs have a choice between 24dB/octave and 48(8th order). I also started to learn something about notch filters that I could not account for. In the speaker, the x-over was soldered on a circuit board. This seemed like brain surgery at the time and I could have ended up with a pile of parts. Now, with a bit more knowledge, these aren't simple problems but nothing insurmountable.

There was one other alternative, or so I thought. I bought a dual, 23 position rotary switch (attenuator) and a bag of resistors. This ain't cheap either and it certainly wasn't easy but Mr. Doohicky was happy.. Soldering 46 tiny resitors on a tiny switch is not fun. The ones that can be bought preassembled had a higher range than I needed. I chose all the resistors between 1K and 3K and added a DPDT switch that added another 3K (paralleled 6K), 6K or nada. Much better. No more fiddling with it, at least not after the first month, and no bloating. It also gave a great way to adjust the bass to my tastes. The DPDT switch turned out to be unnecessary.

Granted, an active would have killed that passive parasite and made the speaker much more efficient, I still have to wonder. I was planning on building a set of speakers from the ground up with an active x-over, because I'm convinced that's the best, but a sweet deal popped up.

The next set of speakers had an active x-over/bass amp from the factory. Well, semi-active, but let's not go there. It has controls for gain, low-pass, hi-pass and phase. Hooked it up with those little monoblocks because I didn't exxpect the midbass and up to take much power. Lots of trial and error with the settings and location. Changed from RCA to XLR. Different preamps, even built one myself. Learned that phase is more than quarter turns (90 degrees) and could hear within 10 to 15 degrees on either side and went for the middle.

No matter what I did, there was a dip at the crossover until a friend brought over his behemoth SS amp and the dip went away. I also tried with tube amps but not my taste. You could say the little monoblocks was a mismatch of character. The 1600 watt bass amp had a lot more. I was expecting to buy a new amp for the speakers but not quite so soon. Now, I've got three behemoths and it all worked out beautifully. By the way, bridging does work for some amps.

If you want to know see how complex it can be to make a versatile x-over, check out Wisdom's "Brain".

Did you expect a short story?