Is there a reason more of you aren't running active? - AVS Forum
Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
post #1 of 112 Old 02-16-2013, 10:39 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
bass addict's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: A padded room
Posts: 3,774
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 210
As I start to get more involved in a DIY main build, I can't help but have flashbacks of my car audio days. smile.gif My latest setups were utilizing 3 ways and all of them were run actively. I'm really curious as to why more of the guys on here (especially considering all of the uber builds going on), haven't gone that direction. The cost is a little bit more, but not insanely so. It would allow ultimate flexibility and prevent having to build multiple xovers should you want to change out components.

I'm really leaning towards going with an active setup, unless someone can provide reasoning behind staying away. I'm thinking for around 2k you could have a nice AE/SEOS front stage, with xover, and amplification???

Achievement Unlocked

Psychotic Episode Averted

bass addict is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #2 of 112 Old 02-16-2013, 10:55 PM
AVS Special Member
 
N8DOGG's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Canada
Posts: 5,583
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 39 Post(s)
Liked: 240
If I was to build my own mains, I'd go active. I just got some Noesis a few months ago. I'd doubt I'll ever be able to build anything better hahaha

Blasting brown notes for 10 years and counting!

N8DOGG is offline  
post #3 of 112 Old 02-16-2013, 11:32 PM
AVS Special Member
 
lilmike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Pacific Northwest
Posts: 2,161
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 71
Active is great when multi-channel amps are cheap and plentiful, like in a car setting. I've run full-active car setups on and off for years now, about to do another.

In a HT setting, multi-channel amps really aren't cheap...and there are a lotta channels involved.

I am looking at options for a 3 X 3-way setup (just the L, C and R). That will require nine channels of amplification, as well as nine channels of crossover.

Not cheap, and not simple.

I can tell you from experience that you're now looking at a whole lot more things that can and will go wrong with your system.

See, I'm not the only one that operates mine...
If Mrs. Lilmike decides to watch a movie, the HT system had better just work, and it had better do so with a press of the remote, not flipping eleven switches in a certain order.

If not....well, if you don't understand what this means already, chances are you'll learn soon enough. Not fun.
lilmike is offline  
post #4 of 112 Old 02-16-2013, 11:43 PM
Member
 
fperra's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Tacoma, WA USA
Posts: 189
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 22
I'm running active on my two front left and rights and my center channel. All three are bi-amp'd. I wouldn't think of doing it any other way.
fperra is offline  
post #5 of 112 Old 02-17-2013, 12:12 AM
Member
 
genesplitter's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Oakland, CA
Posts: 18
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 10
I run active, using plans from Siegfried Linkwitz (co-inventor of the L-R filter). I would never consider owning a passive speaker again. Here is a good technical article explaining some of the benefits of active speakers - http://sound.westhost.com/bi-amp.htm
genesplitter is offline  
post #6 of 112 Old 02-17-2013, 12:47 AM
AVS Special Member
 
A9X-308's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Australia; now run by adults.
Posts: 5,150
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
Liked: 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by bass addict View Post

The cost is a little bit more, but not insanely so.
That's the most often given reason: cost. But I agree that it need not be that much more expensive if you shop carefully.

I haven't built a passive speaker in ages, everything incl surrounds is active.
Quote:
Originally Posted by lilmike View Post

I can tell you from experience that you're now looking at a whole lot more things that can and will go wrong with your system.
Like what?

Quote:
Originally Posted by lilmike View Post

See, I'm not the only one that operates mine...
If Mrs. Lilmike decides to watch a movie, the HT system had better just work, and it had better do so with a press of the remote, not flipping eleven switches in a certain order.

If not....well, if you don't understand what this means already, chances are you'll learn soon enough. Not fun.
A sequencer isn't that hard to build. I've been umming and ahhing whether to put a design out there for a while, but I'm wary of mains projects because I don't trust people to put it together without hurting themselves or making it safely.
A9X-308 is offline  
post #7 of 112 Old 02-17-2013, 01:36 AM
Advanced Member
 
Manic1!'s Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Posts: 745
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Liked: 21
You also need an AVR with pre outs. That's at least a few hundred added to the cost. Then you also have space and issues with the extra amps. Your looking at a minimum $1000 extra for an active front 3.
Manic1! is offline  
post #8 of 112 Old 02-17-2013, 02:24 AM
Member
 
paskal9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: tropics @97% humidity
Posts: 138
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
i used to run a fully active HT setup. all 7 channels of it.
i ran the system with 34 channel of amplification, bridged into 17 effective channel. triamped fronts and center, biamped surrounds. every driver gets a bridged channel, including the tweeters.
active crossover constructed following the reference circuit by Rod Elliott (ESP) (sound.westhost.com).

one of the amp that i used, this one drives the surround and houses 16 channel (8 channel bridged).


then one fine day, one of the channels decide to short itself out, taking with it another channel and 2 of my midrange.
didn't build the modules with DC protection and only have myself to blame.

i've since reverted back to passive since it's simpler to work with.

paskal9 is offline  
post #9 of 112 Old 02-17-2013, 04:18 AM
Senior Member
 
WVSyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 333
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 42
Basically ( as Mike P said ) it can be more costly and sophisticated.
I have had an all active system for the better part of a decade and wouldn't go back.
It has been the de facto SOP for Pro Sound for quite a while now.

"Beware of Salesmen: They are the modern Svengali, immune to Science and Reality"
WVSyd is offline  
post #10 of 112 Old 02-17-2013, 06:27 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Martycool007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 3,342
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 67 Post(s)
Liked: 135
I know absolutely nothing about passive crossovers, so I plan to go active on my next build, but, I have been told by several knowledgeable guys that using an active crossover is just as complicated as a passive crossover when dealing with the filters, slopes, ect..of trying to properly implement an active crossover. Take that for what it is worth, I have no idea of how hard it would be to setup an active crossover because I have never done it. I am getting ready to build a trio of either Statements or Corn-Scalas for my home theater, and will order the parts on Tuesday. I plan on going active with those and use 5 Behringer EP1.5k amps for all 9 channels of amplification. That will leave one channel left over. I am still debating on which active crossover to use....perhaps the miniDsp or the DBX.
Martycool007 is offline  
post #11 of 112 Old 02-17-2013, 07:31 AM
Senior Member
 
WVSyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 333
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 42
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martycool007 View Post

... but, I have been told by several knowledgeable guys that using an active crossover is just as complicated as a passive crossover when dealing with the filters, slopes, ect..of trying to properly implement an active crossover...
It is easier to implement higher order slope when it done on a line level signal than post amplification power level with passive components. At signal level, knee frequency and "action" and other phase aspects changes can be implement almost instantaneously.
Basically easier to tweak listen and adjust and additional flexibility.

"Beware of Salesmen: They are the modern Svengali, immune to Science and Reality"
WVSyd is offline  
post #12 of 112 Old 02-17-2013, 09:37 AM
AVS Special Member
 
lilmike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Pacific Northwest
Posts: 2,161
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by A9X-308 View Post

That's the most often given reason: cost. But I agree that it need not be that much more expensive if you shop carefully.

I haven't built a passive speaker in ages, everything incl surrounds is active.
Like what?
A sequencer isn't that hard to build. I've been umming and ahhing whether to put a design out there for a while, but I'm wary of mains projects because I don't trust people to put it together without hurting themselves or making it safely.

Like the one's I've experienced using a cobbled together active system for prototype work:
Ground loop issues
Gain structure issues
Phase issues, and
Noise floor issues

Seriously, the one that is most important to me is operator issues.

I have no problem with active subs, that makes complete sense. I have no doubt that can make active mains work too. The question I continue to ask myself is: "Is it worth it?"

I completely understand the need when you're looking for high-order slopes and lower crossover frequencies. Currently, my crossovers are not that complex or costly to implement passively, and the results are more than adequate for my current situation.
lilmike is offline  
post #13 of 112 Old 02-17-2013, 02:03 PM
AVS Special Member
 
A9X-308's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Australia; now run by adults.
Posts: 5,150
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
Liked: 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by lilmike View Post

Like the one's I've experienced using a cobbled together active system for prototype work:
Ground loop issues
Gain structure issues
Phase issues, and
Noise floor issues
And once the issues are solved in the final solution (i.e. not prototype), they are entirely irrelevant for the rest of the life of the system.

Operator issues can be solved either with training and/or a hardware solution.
A9X-308 is offline  
post #14 of 112 Old 02-17-2013, 03:28 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jpmst3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Davidsville, PA
Posts: 8,115
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 186
It would be nice, especially if one likes to experiment with different builds, drivers and crossovers.
However, as Mike mentioned it gets costly amp-wise and usually that also means quite a few more wires.

jpmst3 is offline  
post #15 of 112 Old 02-17-2013, 03:42 PM
AVS Special Member
 
lilmike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Pacific Northwest
Posts: 2,161
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 71
Quote:
Originally Posted by A9X-308 View Post

And once the issues are solved in the final solution (i.e. not prototype), they are entirely irrelevant for the rest of the life of the system.

Granted.
Quote:
Originally Posted by A9X-308 View Post

Operator issues can be solved either with training and/or a hardware solution.

Don't think you've met Mrs. Lilmike, have you...

Training?? Not gonna happen. It had better "just work".

We moved to new our house. Same remote we've used for 5 years, same programming, same cable box, same TV. Only thing that changed was the room it was in...

She could not make it work...
lilmike is offline  
post #16 of 112 Old 02-17-2013, 03:45 PM
AVS Special Member
 
jpmst3's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Davidsville, PA
Posts: 8,115
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5 Post(s)
Liked: 186
biggrin.gif Don't mean to laugh, but that did make me chuckle.

We all know the A/V challenged. eek.gif I have set things up as simple as possible....

jpmst3 is offline  
post #17 of 112 Old 02-17-2013, 03:45 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
bass addict's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: A padded room
Posts: 3,774
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 210
Quote:
Originally Posted by lilmike View Post



We moved to new our house. Same remote we've used for 5 years, same programming, same cable box, same TV. Only thing that changed was the room it was in...

She could not make it work...

Lulz. I know how that goes. biggrin.gif

Achievement Unlocked

Psychotic Episode Averted

bass addict is offline  
post #18 of 112 Old 02-17-2013, 03:49 PM
AVS Special Member
 
lilmike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Pacific Northwest
Posts: 2,161
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 71
Won't be an issue in the theater - that's mine...but the theater is at least two years from completion, probably closer to three.

The main system is "shared" so the functionality has to be appliance level, it has to just work. Since that's the only system I am running at the moment, it has to stay simple.
lilmike is offline  
post #19 of 112 Old 02-17-2013, 04:26 PM
AVS Special Member
 
bhazard's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: NY
Posts: 2,409
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 36
Once I finish up building my first pair of speakers and subs, I would consider going active afterwords at some point.

Reason being staying passive first, is that I need a reference as to how the speakers sound with a well designed passive crossover, compared to what I would come up with by tweaking with active and Minidsps. I just don't have the knowledge yet, but I'll get there.
bhazard is offline  
post #20 of 112 Old 02-17-2013, 05:46 PM
AVS Special Member
 
A9X-308's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Australia; now run by adults.
Posts: 5,150
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
Liked: 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by jpmst3 View Post

that also means quite a few more wires.
I fail to see how that is much of a practical issue. Use a Speakon at the cabinet end and tape/shrinkwrap the 3 wires together or put them in some of that nylon sock stuff. Now you have (effectively) a single cable of 6 conductors.

Quote:
Originally Posted by lilmike View Post

Granted.
Don't think you've met Mrs. Lilmike, have you...

Training?? Not gonna happen. It had better "just work".

We moved to new our house. Same remote we've used for 5 years, same programming, same cable box, same TV. Only thing that changed was the room it was in...

She could not make it work...
I understand where you're coming from, but there is almost always a simple solution. If the shared system has an AVR, most have a 12V accessory which can drive a relay(s) to power everyting else on so no one else would need to know how it works, PHD (Push Here Dummy) solution. No 12V output? Use a single switch.

It amases me how some people can spend time to learn how to use REW, Holm, PCD, about acoustics, DSPs and speaker design, which are far more complicated subjects, but don't see straightforward solutions to the minor operational differences of an active system that are easy to implement or work around.

The only two potential downsides to active are cost and more space taken up.
A9X-308 is offline  
post #21 of 112 Old 02-17-2013, 06:12 PM
AVS Special Member
 
coctostan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: Indy
Posts: 1,960
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 127
There are two main reasons people don't go active DSP for mains (and why the vast majority of DIYers shouldn't).

First is cost. Given the choice between spending an extra $100-200 a speaker on going active or upgrading drivers you should chose the better drivers unless you already have upper echelon drivers and the next step is an order of magnitude higher. The majority of DIYers are looking for great bang for buck and until you get into crazy builds active is very low bang for buck. Most DIY mains builds in here would add 50-100% to the cost with active DSP.

Second is complexity. Most DIYers have no clue how to properly design an active DSP speaker. All of the speaker design principles are the same as passive and most DIYers aren't interested in going down that learning rabbit hole. Most just want great speakers for a good price. I'd guess that a good number of DIYers who go the DSP route assume you can set a LPF to LR24 @ 1000hz and a Lr24 HPF @ 1000hz and voila...speaker! (I'm not suggesting anyone on this thread has done that...but I've received at least a hundred PMs from people asking why they are underwhelmed when they do this). Many people don't even understand that measurements must be used or even how to take proper measurements. Oh yeah it also takes a good amount of time to go with the knowledge most people don't have. Active DSP is not a shortcut.

Then add in the issues that Lilmike brought up about gain structure, turn on pops, etc and you can see why people tend to not do that. Most people want to cut some wood, solder a simple crossover and get a $2000 speaker for $500 + time + sweat.

The fact is that an active DSP DIY speaker done wrong is far worse AND more expensive than a simple passive design....and if most DIYers aren't able to pull it off (although IMO anyone willing to learn and put lots of time in can do it...it isn't black magic).

With all that said I use active DSP sometimes but I have speaker design experience and I only use it on higher end designs.
coctostan is offline  
post #22 of 112 Old 02-17-2013, 07:25 PM - Thread Starter
AVS Special Member
 
bass addict's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: A padded room
Posts: 3,774
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 6 Post(s)
Liked: 210
Quote:
Originally Posted by coctostan View Post

There are two main reasons people don't go active DSP for mains (and why the vast majority of DIYers shouldn't).

First is cost. Given the choice between spending an extra $100-200 a speaker on going active or upgrading drivers you should chose the better drivers unless you already have upper echelon drivers and the next step is an order of magnitude higher. The majority of DIYers are looking for great bang for buck and until you get into crazy builds active is very low bang for buck. Most DIY mains builds in here would add 50-100% to the cost with active DSP.

I think that's the most sensible statement I've heard.

It makes sense that until one has maxed out a particular part of the chain, that one should spend the majority of funds on the items that would have the greatest impact on the listening environment.

Achievement Unlocked

Psychotic Episode Averted

bass addict is offline  
post #23 of 112 Old 02-17-2013, 09:39 PM
Member
 
gbegland's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 128
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Liked: 12
Integrated solutions like the Digmoda(which is now available direct) and miniDSP, while not cheap, help to lower the wiring complexity and racks full of gear to go active. IMO, active is the only way to go for reference level builds. You will never fully optimize a passive multi-way, complex system the way you can with DSP. Sweep, push a few buttons and BAM, sweep again.

My last two builds both used the Digmoda 552's and before that a BSS Omnidrive processor with Bryston and Crown amps. I'm never going backwards from there. One is my hi-fi set-up, the other a new reference monitor prototype for the studio.

Greg



gbegland is offline  
post #24 of 112 Old 02-17-2013, 10:31 PM
Senior Member
 
javi404's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Location: NJ
Posts: 213
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 11
After reading this there is something that hasn't been discussed directly. The fact that the more pieces in a machine you have, the more chances are that one of those pieces will break and disable the system. The more moving pieces in a machine (ok so not moving in this case) the more chances something will break.

example: Someone above mentioned an amplifier channel failing and taking out multiple channels of that amp/system.

And I am totally on-board about the usability of the system as a concern unless you are a hermit.

If my 13 year old daughter can not just turn on the TV and watch something, then what is the point of building something that only I can enjoy?
If i have someone come over to house sit my cats, do I want to have a training session with them? or just tell them, this remote is all you need, hit this one button to turn things on.

The technical advantage to multi amping each band of each driver for each channel sounds great, but how feasible is that setup in a daily used system? What level of automation are we talking about to make it so that you don't have 16 channels of amplification turn on and off with the press of a button including the display or projector?
javi404 is offline  
post #25 of 112 Old 02-17-2013, 10:59 PM
Member
 
paskal9's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: tropics @97% humidity
Posts: 138
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 24
Quote:
Originally Posted by javi404 View Post

After reading this there is something that hasn't been discussed directly. The fact that the more pieces in a machine you have, the more chances are that one of those pieces will break and disable the system. The more moving pieces in a machine (ok so not moving in this case) the more chances something will break.

example: Someone above mentioned an amplifier channel failing and taking out multiple channels of that amp/system.

And I am totally on-board about the usability of the system as a concern unless you are a hermit.

If my 13 year old daughter can not just turn on the TV and watch something, then what is the point of building something that only I can enjoy?
If i have someone come over to house sit my cats, do I want to have a training session with them? or just tell them, this remote is all you need, hit this one button to turn things on.

The technical advantage to multi amping each band of each driver for each channel sounds great, but how feasible is that setup in a daily used system? What level of automation are we talking about to make it so that you don't have 16 channels of amplification turn on and off with the press of a button including the display or projector?
well you don't need as much channel. if it's 2 way or MTM then 2 channel to each speaker is enough to run active.
but it is (a lot) more complex compared to a passive setup where 1 channel to each speaker is enough for most people.

some people find it more satisfying after running active. a lot of the people that i've encountered did mention that it's unlikely they'll be going back to a passive config after running active. it's a complex setup, but the reward does seem to be worth it.

yes there's more things that need to turned on, but most of the people here don't seem to mind using multiple amp to drive their multitude of subs.
rather than adding more and more sub and more and more amp to drive the sub, it could maybe be more beneficial to run the speakers active.

paskal9 is offline  
post #26 of 112 Old 02-17-2013, 11:13 PM
AVS Special Member
 
A9X-308's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Australia; now run by adults.
Posts: 5,150
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
Liked: 41
Quote:
Originally Posted by javi404 View Post

After reading this there is something that hasn't been discussed directly. The fact that the more pieces in a machine you have, the more chances are that one of those pieces will break and disable the system. The more moving pieces in a machine (ok so not moving in this case) the more chances something will break.

example: Someone above mentioned an amplifier channel failing and taking out multiple channels of that amp/system.

And I am totally on-board about the usability of the system as a concern unless you are a hermit.

If my 13 year old daughter can not just turn on the TV and watch something, then what is the point of building something that only I can enjoy?
If i have someone come over to house sit my cats, do I want to have a training session with them? or just tell them, this remote is all you need, hit this one button to turn things on.

The technical advantage to multi amping each band of each driver for each channel sounds great, but how feasible is that setup in a daily used system? What level of automation are we talking about to make it so that you don't have 16 channels of amplification turn on and off with the press of a button including the display or projector?
I'm assuming that most people have an AVR in system or have a learning remote like a Harmony and use macros to turn on. So when the AVR goes on, 12V trigger goes on and drives a realy or relays to turn on the amps for the multi amping. If no 12V trigger, then a simple button or switch manually done could do the same. For $20 more you can even get them to sequence on/off with a microcontroller.

My system is a lot more complicated than this but to use it you would need to know how to work a Harmony One remote, that it takes about 40 secs to power up from cold, where the IR sensor is and that you use the integrated keyboard/trackball to make control the HTPC where movies and music are stored. All other functions are on th H1.
A9X-308 is offline  
post #27 of 112 Old 02-18-2013, 04:21 AM
AVS Special Member
 
Martycool007's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 3,342
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 67 Post(s)
Liked: 135
Quote:
Originally Posted by WVSyd View Post

It is easier to implement higher order slope when it done on a line level signal than post amplification power level with passive components. At signal level, knee frequency and "action" and other phase aspects changes can be implement almost instantaneously.
Basically easier to tweak listen and adjust and additional flexibility.
'''


Can you, or someone else explain what the benefits are to using a higher order slope? What exactly is a slope and how does a higher order slope best a lower order slope?
Martycool007 is offline  
post #28 of 112 Old 02-18-2013, 06:35 AM
Senior Member
 
WVSyd's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 333
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Liked: 42
Filters ( of which crossovers are a type ) modify the electrical signal by routing or blocking or diverting certain frequencies and sometimes allowing others. Because speakers are imperfect electromagnetic devices, it is often necessary to route signal to certain devices by virtue of frequency. ( example tweeters can't handle bass frequencies without damage ).
Crossover filters transfer signal at a rate. This transfer rate is often stated in terms of db per octave.
It is not a matter of a higher slope being intrinsically better: It has it's tradeoffs and design and implementation considerations.
No driver is perfect, so some require that the range of operation frequencies be carefully controlled ( because they would sound bad or be damaged by power )
In the world of Pro Sound - the rooms are bigger and higher SPL and power is required - active crossovers are a practical necessity.
In home audio with lower SPL and power requirement it is possible ( with careful driver selection and matching ) to create successful designs with lower order slopes.

Filters are a complex subject ( entire classes are held on the filter design - been there wink.gif ).

If you need some links I can provide some - gimme a clue as to complexity as I have a habit of linking to material from academia which may not help at all.

"Beware of Salesmen: They are the modern Svengali, immune to Science and Reality"
WVSyd is offline  
post #29 of 112 Old 02-18-2013, 06:48 AM
Senior Writer @ AVS
 
imagic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Posts: 5,109
Mentioned: 6 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 563 Post(s)
Liked: 1621
I'm all active up front. It's the most worthwhile upgrade there is.

Find out more about Mark Henninger at www.imagicdigital.com
imagic is offline  
post #30 of 112 Old 02-18-2013, 07:24 AM
AVS Addicted Member
 
MKtheater's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: New Hartford, NY
Posts: 14,172
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 78 Post(s)
Liked: 396
I am fully active on all channels. I use so called high quality amps(5 channels) with the DCX. Awesome!
MKtheater is offline  
Reply DIY Speakers and Subs

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off