Is Bi - amping worth the trouble?

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
>

Gain or loss of signal "strength" is measured in decibels, Do not confuse signal strength with sound pressure levels. there is more than one way to look at things. I was talking about the post alluding to signal degredation... how one could confuse signal loss or distortion and see it as sound pressure level indications, is beyond me.

Don't worry, Sean, You can't pick on me... especially if you and I are not talking about the same thing... and little of this aside has anything to do with the thrust of the notion as to wether or not bi amping is worth it I would think. Decibels are used to measure more than simple sound levels. Just a reminder for the more pedantic.

All I said, in my previous follow up, was I do not believe the addition of more amplifiers and the required peripherals will degrade the sound, or the signal to the extent that it is diffused or distorted. were that the case, ONLY the shortest path for the signal should ever be pursued. hence, with that sort of thinking, 'seperates' would not truly the best approach.... this is not the apparent case however as the largest majority of systems are comprised of separates.

So, it should stand to reason, the addition of more than one amp to develop a signal, should not, in and of itself, be seen as detraction from the bi amping path, or in any fashion provide an inheirent issue for signal improprieities. there's bigger fish to fry with adding amps than the worry of signal loss.

Hope that helps.