Active vs passive X-over

 

Gold Member
Username: Touche6784

USA

Post Number: 1158
Registered: Nov-04
I think this was discussed before but I can't find the thread. I am in the process of making external crossovers for my new maggies and was wondering what difference in sound I would have if I use active electronic crossovers?
 

Silver Member
Username: Arande2

400dB could probably d..., 4000 isnt ev... 100,000dB FU...

Post Number: 653
Registered: Dec-06
I don't know, but I do like the advantage of more control with active. I don't know about the sound. SORRY for wasting your time?
 

Gold Member
Username: Timn8ter

Seattle, WA USA

Post Number: 1180
Registered: Dec-03
In theory, active crossovers with dedicated amplifiers for each section are superior in every aspect (except cost) to passive crossovers.
I've not met anyone that thought systems using active crossovers sounded worse than passive.
 

Silver Member
Username: Gamerdude

Ontario Canada

Post Number: 356
Registered: Apr-06
My dad has some audiocontrol ones and he's allawsy saying get those "hammer smaching ones" out and go active. He says he will save power from the amp, which is true but doesnt bothor me there really isnt but in the sound department ecccept being louder becuase its like a direct route to the speakers in stead of going threw the copper coils

Allso there more for concerts and movies from what i heard
 

Gold Member
Username: Jan_b_vigne

Dallas, TX

Post Number: 9623
Registered: May-04
.


http://sound.westhost.com/site-map.htm



https://www.ecoustics.com/electronics/forum/home-audio/308495.html


.
 

Gold Member
Username: Timn8ter

Seattle, WA USA

Post Number: 1181
Registered: Dec-03
The main point to take away is that the amplifier is connected directly to the driver meaning the driver has the full amount of control the amp can provide.
 

Gold Member
Username: Touche6784

USA

Post Number: 1159
Registered: Nov-04
How much would the average decent quality active XO cost me and what brand? Thanks for the links and posts.
 

Gold Member
Username: Timn8ter

Seattle, WA USA

Post Number: 1182
Registered: Dec-03
Kit
http://www.marchandelec.com/xovers.html
DIY
http://www.snippets.org/filters/crossover.htm
or....
http://www.deqx.com/stereo.html
 

Gold Member
Username: Frank_abela

Berkshire UK

Post Number: 1826
Registered: Sep-04
My understanding is that in theory, active crossovers typically have about 10 times less distortion than the higher powered passive crossovers required to drive the same speakers.

However, I've heard active systems on a few occasions (not recently I admit), and I have always found that the cost/performance ratio doesn't stack up. i.e. if you have 2 stereo amplifiers to drive the two sections of the speaker and add in the cost of the active crossover, is this a better result than one better amplifier into passive crossovers into the same speakers? Very often I find that the passive solution is better. I can only assume that this is because the weaknesses of the 2 less capable amplifiers are a worse problem to have than the weaknesses of the passive crossovers.

Regards,
Frank.
 

Gold Member
Username: Timn8ter

Seattle, WA USA

Post Number: 1183
Registered: Dec-03
....until now
 

Silver Member
Username: Stefanom

Vienna, VA United States

Post Number: 291
Registered: Apr-06
The active ultra-high slope x-o in the latest NHT has definitely piqued my interest. Of course the DEQX does much much more than that, but still, its pretty neat stuff. Of course their 2.1 system is 6k, but thats with everything. It is on my short list to audition.
 

Silver Member
Username: Gamerdude

Ontario Canada

Post Number: 358
Registered: Apr-06
Audiocontrol
« Previous Thread Next Thread »



Main Forums

Today's Posts

Forum Help

Follow Us