As you said, it may NOT be what I think, and I’m happy to say so. I also think like usual, it depends. And please correct me if I’m wrong. But don’t both sets of terminals usually pass through the same path in the passive XO? Wouldn’t that negate any possible advantages?
Thanks for sharing!
Depending on what you meant by the same path, you may be right. About the "you think..." part, I normally would avoid implying I know what people think, so my apology for even saying that, but to be clear, in this case I referred to your comment on the "...negate........" part only.
I am happy to share what Steve shared
:
Bi-amping vs Bi-wiring: What's the Difference and is it Audible? | Audioholics
You can see that while the signal paths are the same, that is, going from the amp speaker terminals to the crossover terminals and then to the crossover terminals, assuming that's what you meant by "the same path".
That does not negate the theoretical difference, that the amp for the high frequency band will be much less affected by the low frequency band current that the amp would otherwise have to deliver, via that "same path".
Such theoretical difference would, in my opinion and experience, not result in any audible difference if say instead of biamping with two 100 W amps, just use a single 200 W amp and use heavy gauge wires than those used in non bi-amp method. That's just my opinion, others, such as at least a couple of speaker manufacturers that I know of, suggested that there may be audible differences, but again as always, it would depend.... For example, Focal used to claim that if the passive crossovers are designed properly, there is no need to bi-amp for audible improvements. That, go without saying that they at least implied if the crossovers are not designed well enough, there may be audible improvements with the bi-amp scheme. If true, that could explain why some people insisted on getting audible improvements, though I do think many of such claims were for other reasons.
It would be great to hear
@D Murphy 's comments on why the crossover design may impact on whether bi-amp could make an audible difference, or not. May be he could even give us some easy to understand example.
Another example is Anthem/Paradigm, though I am somewhat skeptical of what they said about the active vs passive XO part:
"Doesn't passive biamping waste the amp's power because each channel still has to amplify the full range signal and not just the highs or the lows?
No. With the jumpers removed on a biampable speaker, the impedance of each section is not the usual 4 or 8 ohms, but several hundred if not more at the frequencies that the amp is "not supposed to be amplifying". Higher impedance means less current draw. No meaningful amount of current, no wasted power.
According a recurring audio-myth, only an active crossover should be used for biamping, in order to split the band before the power amp instead of inside the speaker, thereby reducing the amount of work each amp channel has to do. While active crossovers do have their place in PA systems, it should be noted that equalizers are also a part of it.
A generic active crossover on its own merely divides the audio band into smaller ones. The carefully custom-designed crossover in a high performance home audio speaker does a lot more. It is responsible for correcting frequency response aberrations of the individual drivers, maintaining phase coherence between drivers, optimizing off-axis response, balancing levels between drivers, setting up impedance, at times improving woofer performance by rolling off not just the top, but also frequencies that are too low and cause it to misbehave, and other things that vary according to model."
Tearing out the speaker's own finely-tuned crossover to replace it with an active crossover with generic controls almost guarantees that, just for starters, frequency response will be altered. Different sound doesn't mean better sound. Using the passive crossover in the speaker is indeed the correct way to biamp.
(What's biamping? It's using one amp channel for the speaker's mid-high frequency drivers, and another for the low-frequency drivers. The speakers must have separate inputs for this - be sure to remove the jumpers from the speaker inputs first or amp will become instant toast! If one amp starts running out of power, usually the one driving the woofer, then the other side remains clean instead of becoming part of the problem, a double-win. This is the very idea behind bass management and powered subwoofers in home theater systems.)"
To sum up, as I posted many times before, there are definitely differences between passive bi-amp and vs not in terms of electrical theory, the question is whether such difference would result in improved sound quality. I would think not in general but I would not rule out under some conditions, it may..
