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

Passive bi/tri amp means the amp is NOT getting only the frequencies the speaker driver needs. So each amp is amplifying all the frequencies aand the speaker has to throw away the energy that spaker does not actuall use, by heating up the parts of the crossover, OR, the speaker gets to use all those frequencies it can respond to, even if that messes up the overall frequency responses of the combined drivers.
I cannot personally understand the desire to bi amp or tri amp with the actual difficulties involved. The only way biamping makes sense is to use an active crossover to separate the frequencies before the amp.

@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?

@Elizabeth: I'm gonna make a big assumption here...so don't hurt me. :-) I'm assuming that Mirage built them this way, and recommends multi-amping, as a means to better sound from the speaker. I've read the same of B&W speakers. Maybe it is a bad assumption...I just want to get the best sound out of them.

I look at it like a multi-processor PC...a PC with multiple processors, in general, runs better than a single processing PC. Just an analogy...not trying to get into that debate. Or a 12 cylinder engine as opposed to a 4...12 will perform magnificently comparatively. Does that make sense? Sometime I don't explain well. :-D

Bi-amping, whether you advocate it or not, is one of the largest wastes of Internet bandwidth. It is argued and discussed incessantly and each side of the argument never convinces the other. Even active bi-amping is disputable these days.

In this case, if the OP really believes his speakers are underpowered, I would advise him to buy a good 200wpc amp with the emphasis on good.

Yes the speakers mentioned by the OP (you) do have that option. Some posting is part for the OP and part for the years of searching and reading going to go on long after the OP forgets about the topic.
So I do tend to write a bit more than is needed.
Sorry.
(and i do tend to disparage multi amping. Folks CAN use it well, the trouble is folks who do not know much, wanting to do it. It is NOT easy to do well, and most people are better off just buying a bigger two channel amp straight up. Instead of buying a second amp, finding out it does not work out well, then pissed because they bought TWO amps and are still not happy.
Buy one better amp straight off will usually be much better, unless you are very lucky, or get professional help, or wait until you really know a LOT about it, (and then you would not need to ask a question about it here!)
So IMO you (and most folks) are far better off forgetting about biamping or triamping.
(and I am not disparaging people who do it, just so many ask about it who are in over thier heads about it, when usually it is not very practical. Like you need at least two sets of speaker wires, two or three sets of pre to amp interconnects, and the proper way to handle those if your pre does not have multiple outputs.)
Just trying to be helpful.
Thanks