Originally Posted by cschang
You should call or email Dave at Ascend and discuss this.
I got a reply from Dave at Ascend and thought I'd share it in case anyone out there has a similar question in the future.
Thanks for the inquiry!
>For a long time I've been thinking about buying an active crossover for the sub so that I can avoid sending unnecessary low frequency signal to the mains, and I'm about to pull the trigger on a dbx 234
This would be beneficial and will improve the overall performance of the entire system.
>But I also have this nagging desire to bi-amp the Ascends at some point in the future (either with another UPA-2, or more likely I'd get rid of the UPA-2 and upgrade to the XPA series which has balanced circuitry). Knowing that I'll probably bi-amp down the road, I'm thinking that I ought to buy an active crossover that is good for more than just sending the low frequencies to a sub. With this in mind, I'm wondering if the dbx 234, which uses 24 dB/octave L-R filters, is a poor choice? Is there a better filter type or slope to crossover the tweeters and woofers in the CMT 340SEs? Besides the dbx 234, I've been looking at the Ashly xr-2001, which I believe has variable slope filters, but it costs $200 more, and I'd like to save that money if I can.
OK -- now this is not possible. The CMT-340 can indeed be passively bi-amped. This means that you can connect a power amp to the tweeter input and another amplifier to the woofer input. However, you CAN NOT bypass the internal crossover of the speaker. A crossover like the one in the CMT-340 is far more complex than high pass and low pass filters... It contains various impedance compensation networks, padding and shaping networks and baffle compensation. If it were possible to bypass the internal filters and simply run active filters to the tweeter and woofers, performance would be greatly compromised as you would not be able to replicate the precise transfer functions of the crossover.
Hope this helps and take care!