Bi-Amp Crossover Advice


I have 3 questions:

1)to finally bi-amp my Maggie 3.6R's I need a crossover and I am trying to decide between a Bryson 10b, Marchand 44 or Marchand 126. I plan on using the 2 amps and a sub, so I want to run one amp to the high/mid section of the Maggies and the other amp to the bass panel. Then I want to use the crossover to sum the low frequency and send to the sub (probably below 38hrz). I am shying away from the Marchand 126 because I have read several reviews that say it can color the sound, and I don't want that. I want to hear the amps, not the crossover. So any comments on the Marchand vs the Bryston??

1) I am keeping my Cary CAD 500 MB's for the bass panels, and either using the Cary 120s or (2)McIntosh MC275's bridged. I am leaning towards the Cary for continuity and cost. I am just wondering if 120w per channel is enough for the high/mid's? I am also thinking about the Rogue 150 MB's? Opinions on this set up? I like the idea of the McIntosh amps, I have always loved them, and even if the bi-amping doesn't float my boat, I would prob keep at least one of them, just because they are such awesome amps.

3) With the cost of this "improvement" should I just upgrade my amps to the Bryston 28sst instead? Net cost would be about the same>

Thanks.
macdadtexas
And now to burn the barn regarding crossovers- I have not read anyone describing the real differences between what seem to be the 'big three' quality active crossovers: Bryston B10 standard balanced, Marchand XM44 balanced, and the Rane AC22/23. The Bryston is $3K, and only has gain for mid/high, not the low end. You must rely on your pre amp for that. It has something very few x-over's offer: adjustable crossover slopes, although not as steep as the other two. You are paying for that and it also takes up some real estate inside the chassis. I have read where others point to that 'lack of crowded circuit board' as a weakness of the XM44 in direct comparison to the 10B. To me it is a little gimmicky for wht it brings to the table in non-studio use. Maybe that is why no others have it, nobody is asking for it? James Tanner will not say it but that feature has a negative effect on the signal. Compared to not having that feature anyway. It is also only a two way stereo x-over, you need a pair to go 3 way, $6K!!! The Marchand XM44's ($1,300) down side is the frequencies are fixed based on what you order- once you get it you cannot change frequencies without buying new modules at $100 each plus labor to remove/install new ones unless you are savvy. I do believe that the XM44's balanced frequency module is sonically suprerior and a bit more accurate than any available rotary/adjustable scheme thatmakes contact with several circuits of different value. Take a look at the Marchand modules on their site. Just compare the module to Bryston's rotary multi- frequency scheme. Now imagine if you had a module of the XM44's quality (and size, 2.5 by 5 inches) for every available frequency on the Bryston 10B standard's two frequency knobs. The 10B would become a MASSIVE component costing much, much more. The XM44 has gain for each channel and you can order slopes that are much steeper that the 10B, 48db per octave. The Rane is the most flexible, with gain for each channel, adjustable freqs for each channel, even adds delay if you need it. Rane is balanced only. You must order the Marchand as 2, 3 or 4 way, the Rane is variable 2 or 3 way but I think you need a pair to go 4 way. Rane $450, Marchand XM44 3-way balanced $1300, Bryston 10B $3000. A perfect crossover would combine the Bryston and Marchand- ditch the variable slopes, have gain on each channel with adjustable frquencies. The Rane has that although it does not have the premium parts, low noise or low distortion specs as the Bryston and Marchand. If you are a set-it-and- forget-it guy and you know what freqs and slopes you need, the Marchand is the answer. If you like to fiddle, tweak and expiriment the Bryston or Rane is the ticket, depending on budget. The Rane and it is really quiet and a solid performer if you just want to wade in slowly it is a good value and the most verastile should you change your system. The Rane has the option of being switched to either 2 or 3 way stereo in a single unit, the others do not. To my ear the XM44 and 10B are both dead quiet and I can't pick out which one has the more 'trasparent' sound or better dynamics. IMHO there is defintely not a $2,000 difference (for 2 way stereo XM44 as 10B is 2 way stereo also), that part is a no-brainer. So there you have it, a year of switching cables and long listening to maybe help you make the call. It was fun but of the 3 contenders, one is a permanent member now, bi-amping Magnepan 3.6Rs with Bryston 4BSSTs, guess who won? I suppose it's obvious I ordered the XM-44 with frequency modules and slopes for the Maggies. Besides it has that cool retro sci-fi look also...but I don't want this to be a plug for Marchand here. 3.6R owners, make the move and get that cheezy little box off the rear your speakers.
by Lingbopper
Buy one "quality" amp to run the 3.6's! Bi-Amping is over rated.

I have tried the Bryston and it is not a great xover. I also tried the expensive Pass XV1 and gave up! To Bi-Amp correctly you need two identical amps, because at the crossover point "both" amps are running, and any difference will show up as distortion.

You also need much more cabling, and an excellent active xover that can be set in 0.5 dB steps with proper filter types.

IMO you will not beat the stock 3.6 xover after long term careful listening. The slight advantage of lower IM distortion and increased dynamics, is overtaken with the typical drawbacks.
An Active crossover that is worth checking out is the Accuphase F-25. Accuphase is THE crossover choice in Japan. They have been making active crossover since the seventies. I have an F-25 and it is an excellent unit.