I'm not so sure that would help the OP because just as many if not more people, including some with electrical engineering degrees, fall for the myth that passive bi-amping improves output power. It doesn't. And I don't mean "by much", I mean the traditional FTC 5-rule power rating spec of 20-20kHz, at X% distortion or less, continuous, into an X ohm load (often 8 or 4), X number of stated channels driven, does not increase by even a fraction of a dB!
---
Please keep an open mind and examine the evidence I will present for yourselves, everyone. It's not all that hard to understand with the following graphic I have made of an actual consumer speaker impedance load with and without the tweeter to woofer jumper bars (straps) removed (to allow a bi-amp connection). Let's look at a typical bass frequency which is easy to read on both of the charts I am about to produce, 200 Hz, found in nearly all normal music.
As we all know when passive bi-amping the two amps [the "bass" amp and the "treble" amp] in truth receive the exact same incoming full range signal. So people need to dispel this notion that the bass amp is less burdened because it doesn't "see" the full frequency range. Baloney. BOTH AMPS SEE THE FULL RANGE coming in. So in determining what an amp can do and how loud it can play before the onset of clipping we need to know two simple things:
A) The incoming signal content including its frequency, duration, and level [there's no change there]
and
B) The load the amp sees when reproducing that frequency. [OK, that one does change a bit but not in a significant way for the hardest part of the audible spectrum the amp has to drive, the low bass, as I will now demonstrate.]
Here's the animated GIF I made of a fairly typical 2-way, bi-amp capable speaker [a KEF Q100 IIRC] from another poster (AJ in Florida) . This measurement was made with good, but affordable equipment and there is a little bit of measurement slop (minor inconsistencies) which should be ignored [even how tightly you screw down your speaker wire posts, reading to reading, which alters the electrical connection's contact area, can make this sort of change] plus my Photoshop skills of combining the two images into a single, perfectly overlapped one which alternates as an animation is not so great, but I think people will get the picture.
The two alternating images show the impedance load change in ohms [0-100] on the vertical axis vs. frequency [20-20kHz] on the horizontal axis, measured at the woofer section's speaker terminals with, and then without, the jumper bars to the tweeter in place [i.e. the load the amp will see when using traditional mono-amping vs. the load when passive bi-amping]:
Notice the major changes are in the high frequencies but the low bass stays pretty consistent.
OK, that's what the load appears as to the amp under the two scenarios. Now let's use an Audio Precision analyzer [thanks to Audioholics for posting this detailed graph], to measure what a typical AVR amp channel, in this case from a Denon AVR-4310CI, can do at any given frequency in terms of maximum, continuous power output, measured in watts, in this case into the 4 ohm load the speaker poses in much of the bass range:
OK, now that way have the raw data in front of us, let's do some analysis!
Question 1: When the jumper bars to the tweeter are disconnected so we are just driving the woofer section from this amp by itself, what is the maximum continuous output level in watts this amp channel can produce at 200 Hz, into the speaker's 4 ohm load found at this frequency, before it will start to clip?
The Correct Answer: about 267 watts into the 4 ohm load
Question 2: When the jumper bars to the tweeter are connected so we are driving both the woofer section and also the tweeter section, i.e. conventional mono-amping, what is the maximum continuous output level in watts this amp channel can produce at 200 Hz, into the speaker's 4 ohm load found at this frequency, before it will start clip?
The Correct Answer: also about 267 watts into 4 ohms!
So if our music contains the exceedingly common frequency of 200Hz, how many dB louder can the bi-amped speaker play this frequency before the onset of distortion compared to the same speaker reproducing the same music content but through mono-amping?
The Correct Answer: 0 dB louder, none, i.e. the bi-amped scenario will have clipping problems at the exact same point: that is to say it can not play normal, full range music any more loudly before it will distort (clip).
For those of you who might not know, bass is the hardest part of the frequency range for systems to reproduce, not the treble, which is why using weaker amps for the tweeters in active bi-amp setups can be a useful cost cutting move that usually won't compromise performance. But suddenly having huge amounts of reserve power for the treble, by using an equally powerful tweeter amp when bi-amping, doesn't help us for normal music reproduction because our bottleneck of how loud we can play before we start to clip is pretty much always due to the bass, such as the 200Hz example I just gave.
Passive bi-amping's claim to "improve maximum power output" is baloney, folks. You can neither measure a greater output [with normal full range music] nor hear it. People who claim otherwise are suffering from expectation bias, which is common to every single human on the planet, without exception, including myself.