Passive biamping question

I'm not sure what you mean by passive biamping. You won't double your power by using 2 channels for each speaker; each channel is still 100 watts. You are, however, in a position to increase you sound quality if you do a vertical biamp. You can do that by running the signal from your preamp to the inputs on a pair of channels that share the same power supply. Then take the left and right signal from those 2 channels and plug them both in to one of your speakers. One speaker cable goes to the highs and the other to the lows on you binding posts. Do the exact same thing for the other channel.

That is passive biamping and any improvements in "quality" are debatable.

Kr4

Sorry, but I just noticed your last comment. I'm not sure what you mean. Are you saying passive biamping is what I'm calling vertical biamping?

On further research, it seems that the spectral distibution of music is around a 50-50 split around 250hz, and for a three way system, that is close to where the crossover would be between midrange and woofer. So I'm thinking it could be beneficial.

1. Vertical and horizontal biamping are two ways of connecting the amps but both are passive biamping if they are not implemented with an external active network before the amps and with the internal crossover removed/bypassed.

2. It depends on the music, of course, and that division is certainly possible. However, the power distribution is much more skewed to the bass in most cases. In addition, not everyone's crossover fits the bill.

3. However, it is still hard to see how "beneficial" it can be. Even if it was 50:50 power distribution at the user's low/mid crossover, the absolute maximum effective power increase one could realize would be 3db, the same as you would achieve with a single amp of double your present power. I see no other advantage with a passive arrangement.

4. OTOH, unless you miswire it, there is no downside to biamping and those who are intrigued by it should simply try it for themselves.