Is Bi - amping worth the trouble?

Sean, I was one of the doubters for 30+ years. A recording engineer as well as a tube designer friend of mine kept hounding me to do nothing more than to try bi-amping. About two years ago I get a care package from him including an active crossover by his design and a highly modified 2A3 amp also by his design. Well, needless to say he has not seen the crossover or the amp for two years, I did pay him for them of course. Since than, I have added a true ribbon tweeter and again the addition was astounding, I will never go back to a conventional cone drive for the top.

I guess what continues to astound me, every time I added or changed a component and there was a positive improvement, after several weeks or maybe several months that improvement kind of just became the status Que. It has been 2+ years since I have bi-amped and the system continues to just amaze me. Before I bi-amped I would love to read while the stereo was on, now I have a hard time doing that, I just sit with a big smile and totally get involved with the music. I know it sounds kind of over the top but until you have tried it you may never know what I am talking about. The other side benefit is I am not always looking for that next fix, although I did just buy an 845 amp for the mid/base. More of my money is now spent on software. Sorry for the ramblings but I am a real proponent of bi-amping only if one uses an active crossover................Bob

I agree about passive vs actice bi-amping. The only time that i think passive bi-amping is worth the added cost is if the speakers are a very tough load and / or extreme volumes are required. Obviously, i would prefer to do so using an active crossover, but in some cases, that just isn't feasible. Increasing the headroom on such a system can make for a noticeable difference, but in such cases, you really need GOBS of power to overcome that type of handicap.

On the other hand, going active with "direct drive" sounds better under most any circumstance that i can think of. Sean

sean
...from experience. the signal loss may well be less than -3db occassionally... but as a rule of thumb, it's a safe bet to figure on -3db.... and as I said, "... in cable installations" ... referring to loss, and equating it to degredation... you must have missed that bit... I try to stay on point to answer the question or make a point.

Blindjim -- you've measured that ~3dB loss, in what? Or is it an overall, ball-park figure in resulting spl?
I'm curious, thanks.

Blindjim: -3dB is equivalent to a loss of 50% of the signal, which would not only alter the amplitude, but also the quality of the signal in most cases. I'm not trying to pick on you, but i find that figure to be way out of line to say the least. If someone were to latch onto that figure and use it as a point of reference, it may end up skewing their results or calculations. As such, i questioned this for sake of clarity as others may refer to this thread as point of reference in the Agon archives.

My own experience dictates a loss of appr .1 dB for a good quality connection that maintains similar mating impedances. The more that the mating impedances differ from one another, and the poorer the surface contact between them, the higher the losses involved. From my experience, a 50% drop ( -3dB ) in signal would require one helluva bad connection ( limited clean contact area ) between drastically different mating impedances. Sean
>