2. amps-preamps
  3. 1289429419

Monoblocks, passive bi-amped or passive tri-amped?

I have been doing lots of research, but to no avail. Some writers & speaker builders say you will get sonic benefits from passive bi or tri amping, some say you get nothing. Some say running 2 identical amps will give a 50% increase in power to the speaker…some say zero. IMO it seems logical that an amp pushing 1 driver, as opposed to many, would have an easier load, and thus more headroom, control, speed, detail, etc.

The options I’m considering:
250W D monoblocks
220W D bi-amped
140W A/B tri-amped

I can’t active amp…so need technical info on which of these would sound best, and why. Thanks!
manoterror
timrhu
2,779 posts
 
I have been doing lots of research, but to no avail.

Kal's first response pretty much answers this. If you really want the answer though, you'll have to experiment to know for sure.
6550c
393 posts
 
Isn't most of the power demanded by the woofer? So, adding a second amp for the mids and high doesn't really take much load away from the woofer amp.(assuming a three way design) I agree that adding a second identical amp does not really double the usable power available to the speaker. The tweeter amp mostly goes to waste.

What does "passive" mean? To me, passive indicates something that is not powered. Do you mean you are not using an active x-over and letting the amps get all the signal?
manoterror OP
216 posts
 
I understand there will be no consensus...just looking for any technical info to help in my decision. The reviews I've read, along with people here on audiogon that own them, all say 200 watts per channel minimum, as the dual 8" bass drivers really need power to shine. My current amp (Marantz SR7001) is only 110w per channel (bi-amped). It works fine, and sounds good...but its a receiver, and I want to really setup a nice system with separate processor, and amps.

I'm considering the following (each setup costs around $2,400):
1. 2 class d monoblocks from seymour av, or wyred4sound
2. The bi-amped would likely be a class d wyred4sound 7 channel amp, with fronts bi-amped, and the rest for a 5.1
3. The tri-amped would be 2 of the new Marantz MM7055s. 10 total discrete channels, 6 for the fronts, 1 each for center and surrounds.

I'm just torn as there is so much conflicting information, and I don't want to upgrade this stuff for a long time. Anyways, all info is much appreciated. Even that which I don't want to hear. :-)
Post removed 
manoterror OP
216 posts
 
@6650c: Yes, passive bi-amped...not active x-over. They get the entire signal, but only have to power part of the drivers, instead of all of them.

The tweeter likely doesn't need it's own amp...probably would be wasted. Good point. It only needs a few watts. The Bass definitely needs the power, and now that you mention it...taking the mid/tweeter away wouldn't do a ton. So the lower powered Marantz is likely out. I am still wondering then on the bi-amped for mid/tweet and bass. I would think that not having to split the power between 3 driver sections would benefit them.

Thoughts?
More to discover