[HappymaN]

This may seem like a silly question, and I really hope it isn't.

Is it possible to use one SE9 per channel of amplification, and therefore have, 18W per channel, as opposed to 9W per channel.

I'm in love with the sound of the SE9, but it is just not powerful enough for most speakers. Not enough headroom for the more dynamic passages.

I figured, bi-amping would be a possibility for speakers which allow it, right?

 

[Gopher]

I'm not sure about the SE9's bridging abilities, but have you considered an SE18? I would assume the two to have a similar sound, the power you need and if memory serves you get a second set of binding posts and a phonostage as well.

 

[lan]

You should send an email to Michael Barnes of nOrh about that question.

Such an amp isn't really meant for most speakers but high efficiency ones.

 

[tom hankins]

You could ask Jpelg about the SE18, I think he's using the SE18 with his K-1000's.

 

[jefemeister]

even if you can bridge the SE9, you run into volume matching problems. You'd wind up with a volume control for each speaker which would be a total bitch. I don't think the norh stuff uses stepped attenuators either.

 

[jefemeister]

also, I think you're confusing biamping and bridging.

In a biamp setup, you use one amp to run the left/right woofers and the other to run the left/right tweeters. When you bridge an amplifier you connect the speakers in between the two positive leads and leave the negative leads unattached. Typically then you have one amplifer for each channel with twice the power into each speaker. I personally would never bridge an amp without checking with the manufacturer first.

It's a bad idea to biamp with integrated amplifiers because you'll never get a flat frequency response due to volume matching troubles. I guess it could work out as a nifty little EQ though?