The potential (and real) benefit of going to passive bi-amping is solely about power - as it is the only characteristic of the system being changed. In my case, I have speakers (passive bi-ample) whose sonic character I prefer. Likewise, I have an amplifier that pairs very well with these speakers. To get more output (and greater headroom) from this combination of speaker and amp, I need more power. I could solve this, obviously, by getting a larger amplifier. But a larger amplfier with the characteristics of my current amplifier would be orders of magnitude greater in cost. And I already have this amplifier. So the shorter, more sensible path is to simply add another, identical amplifier and vertically bi-amp. Move the amps near the speakers and get the additional benefit of significantly shorter speaker cables. If you like what you've got but think you may need more power, I say passively bi-amp away! For ref, I have had active bi- and tri-amped systems so I know very well what those benefits (and drawbacks) are.
Am I wasting money on the theory of Bi-amping?
As a long time audiophile I'm finally able to bi-amp my setup. I'm using two identical amps in a vertical bi-amp configuration.
Now me not fully understanding all of the ins/outs of internal speaker crossovers and what not. I've read quite a few people tell me that bi-amping like I'm doing whether it's vertical or horizontal bi-amping is a waste since there's really not a improvement because of how speaker manufacturers design the internal crossovers.
Can anyone explain to a third grader how it's beneficial or if the naysayers are correct in the statement?