No, You Cannot Bi-Amp

Bombaywalla, I agree with your take (I think). It's not so much about the theoretical considerations as it is the execution. Maggies have perpetually been subjected (with good reason) to modifications of their crossovers. Peter Gunn made a pretty nice business out of his crossover mods. Others have gone to the trouble to use external active crossovers, and swear that takes the Maggies to a whole new level. If the new crossovers are better than the old stock ones, it is likely due to better parts and better execution, rather than the inherent advantages of the series design. All I know is, the stock 3.7's sound a whole lot better to my ears than the stock 3.6's, which leads me to hope for a similar improvement in the 20.7's over the 20.1's. But the advice remains, go listen, let your ears be your guide.

Regardless,
It's not worth to rant especially the post that starts with

In my mind

Re Elizabeth's statement: Bombaywalla, I know that you have considerable technical expertise and relevant experience, but upon careful reading I don't see anything unreasonable or technically implausible about Elizabeth's statement. In its essence, at least, which as I read it is:

A few folks are able, with effort to make it work for themselves. In general it is a waste of time, if as much effort was made to have one amp work well. The worst side of it is all the folks who know nothing about it wanting to do it as if it is some easy magic panacea.

I have seen (and answered) more than a few posts here that would justify the last sentence of that statement. (In saying so, I am not implying that the OP in this thread is one of them).

Regards,
-- Al

Hi Al,
Like-wise, you yourself have a lot of technical expertise & your many answers to forum posts written in a congenial manner have been appreciated by me & many others as well.

Where I was coming from was:
* Elizabeth's post, to me, definitely seems like a rant (look at the way it starts off) & it seems to show that she has some grudge against this technique for reasons best known to her.
* she goes on to say that it's not "cool" to biamp but does not say why. In my mind that's where the technical implausibility comes in by omitting the technical reasons for not doing it. Thus, the forum only knows that it's not "cool" but is no better in knowing why not. Since this topic has been brought up by the OP why not discuss the merits & de-merits so that all visiting members can walk away educated. Aren't we in this audio forum to learn & share the knowledge? I don't think we are here to make blanket statements & walk away leaving everyone wondering...
Anyway, that was my angle FWIW. Best Regards.

The problems of newbies asking how to biamp is a regular feature of this and other sites.
Those folks are the ones I am writing about.
As for the reasons, that IS my reason for making it into a rant.
The folks who know what they are with biamping do not ask questions about biamping, as least not on Audiogon.

As for going through all the bother as to why it is not so great an idea.. plenty of posts on the benefits vs downside of biamping have been posted. Are we all supposed to explain the history of the world in every post?

As for Bombaywalla, I realize his need for clarity and precise arguments is bothering him when he reads my posts.
I tend to be oblique, and assume folks have some basic sense. Also perhaps he is not really getting some of my subtle humor?
Anyway, the fact of Bombaywalla not liking my style does not bother me in any way whatsoever. Sorry Bomb.. but you bombed IMO. And I look forward to years of you shaking your head in disgust at my writings.. LOL
(enough folks have appreciated my writing to make me able to easily just ignore bombaywalla's rantings.)