Active wherever possible. I have a few MiniDSPs in hand and use them for anything I make for myself. Spent many years designing passive crossovers - crap (and astonishingly expensive) at best. To be avoided like the plague. Everything, EVERYTHING, sounds better active. Have made and used squads of analog active xovers and the MiniDSP kills them all. If you think a MiniDSP isn't good enough for your system then I pity you.
For speakers I make for others, not so clear cut. System complexity doesn't frighten me but it is a tough sell with punters. Some hear the advantages but most want a 'traditional' passive solution.
For speakers I make for others, not so clear cut. System complexity doesn't frighten me but it is a tough sell with punters. Some hear the advantages but most want a 'traditional' passive solution.
I have used both analogue and digital crossovers.
Analogue active crossovers can be great, but you need to have a pretty good idea of what you want it to do as it is generally less adaptable than digital implementations.
I was so taken by digital crossovers that by far the majority of what I build uses a DSP in it. I have at a guess six DSP based crossovers in use at present, and half a dozen board sets ready to go. My designs use analogue devices adau1442, ad1940 and (ready for this...) PIC32 doing the heavy lifting.
In my opinion, you can do things in the digital domain that make the choice a no brainer. I DO design conventional crossovers, but generally to manage cost and system complexity.
If you are not into such involved DIY, there are options ranging from the minidsp which is mentioned above, and a number of professional crossovers. An extremely affordable unit is the behringer DCX2496.
If you have a few dollars to spare, do yourself a favour and give the active approach a try. If you get it even half right, you will never go back!
Analogue active crossovers can be great, but you need to have a pretty good idea of what you want it to do as it is generally less adaptable than digital implementations.
I was so taken by digital crossovers that by far the majority of what I build uses a DSP in it. I have at a guess six DSP based crossovers in use at present, and half a dozen board sets ready to go. My designs use analogue devices adau1442, ad1940 and (ready for this...) PIC32 doing the heavy lifting.
In my opinion, you can do things in the digital domain that make the choice a no brainer. I DO design conventional crossovers, but generally to manage cost and system complexity.
If you are not into such involved DIY, there are options ranging from the minidsp which is mentioned above, and a number of professional crossovers. An extremely affordable unit is the behringer DCX2496.
If you have a few dollars to spare, do yourself a favour and give the active approach a try. If you get it even half right, you will never go back!
Hold your horses Enzo! Don't blame the technology, blame the people.
They are the ones who don't know what to do with it!
The fact is, DIYers are happy to try out new stuff.
4-way active with analogue crossovers. Crossover points: 80, 500, 5000.
TDM 3-way with output below 500Hz into a EV 2-way with summed subwoofer
output.
Crown K2 into isobaric Soundsplinter RL-p18's for sub.
ESP P101 into Great Plains Audio 515-8G's for mid-bass.
DIY triode KT88 SE mono blocks into JBL 2470's for mids.
ESP P3A into BMS 4540nd's for the highs.
This was the best sounding system. After having problems with the
cathode/heater resistance breaking down on the KT88's, I swapped in
a ESP DOZ with below average results.
IMO, analogue crossovers sound better than digital, although it is
necessary to time align the speakers physically, i.e.; no horn loaded
subwoofers.
TDM 3-way with output below 500Hz into a EV 2-way with summed subwoofer
output.
Crown K2 into isobaric Soundsplinter RL-p18's for sub.
ESP P101 into Great Plains Audio 515-8G's for mid-bass.
DIY triode KT88 SE mono blocks into JBL 2470's for mids.
ESP P3A into BMS 4540nd's for the highs.
This was the best sounding system. After having problems with the
cathode/heater resistance breaking down on the KT88's, I swapped in
a ESP DOZ with below average results.
IMO, analogue crossovers sound better than digital, although it is
necessary to time align the speakers physically, i.e.; no horn loaded
subwoofers.
amazingly similar
Of all the systems described by the respondents, yours is the closest to how I do mine. I have a 4 way analogue 18db/oct crossover manufactured by a local cottage industry. Crossover points: 60, 250, 3.5k Hz.
Also: very nice to see how many are still going the "active" route. It is so much better than the passive crossover route. Yes, the entire system has to be designed to work together. Linear speaker output one octave each side of the crossover point. Physical time alignment works best (as you have mentioned).
Of all the systems described by the respondents, yours is the closest to how I do mine. I have a 4 way analogue 18db/oct crossover manufactured by a local cottage industry. Crossover points: 60, 250, 3.5k Hz.
Also: very nice to see how many are still going the "active" route. It is so much better than the passive crossover route. Yes, the entire system has to be designed to work together. Linear speaker output one octave each side of the crossover point. Physical time alignment works best (as you have mentioned).
Active,
Have gone through DCX2496 - MiniDSP 2x4 - MiniDSP 2x8 and now onto a fully Hypex DLCP and UcD combination (considering this only needs a source, and is a full pre-amp, incredibly short runs to the power amp modules with XO and room, phase correction is really a bargain). Just need a case and another 4 amps to make use of all the channels.
Have gone through DCX2496 - MiniDSP 2x4 - MiniDSP 2x8 and now onto a fully Hypex DLCP and UcD combination (considering this only needs a source, and is a full pre-amp, incredibly short runs to the power amp modules with XO and room, phase correction is really a bargain). Just need a case and another 4 amps to make use of all the channels.
My big stereo/PA system is all active, Beyma 15P1200Nd midbass to EV DH1a at 1.2kHz via a DCX. EQ'd, time-aligned. Working on some subs, but they'll be fed from the DCX too. Its so useful!
My little stereo is a pair of Behringer B2031P monitors. I don't doubt that the active might be better, but a deal came up that I couldn't refuse. Again, digital XO to a small sealed sub (2x JBL GTO1214) that's EQ'd to death with the DSP.
Chris
My little stereo is a pair of Behringer B2031P monitors. I don't doubt that the active might be better, but a deal came up that I couldn't refuse. Again, digital XO to a small sealed sub (2x JBL GTO1214) that's EQ'd to death with the DSP.
Chris
ultimate crossovers
listen to a 5 way system with sealed 2 subs, sealed 15" bass, sealed 10" midbass, JMLC350 horns with GPA388 mids and JMLC1000/Celestion 1425 tweeters.
Linear phase NT 2nd order crossovers made with Acourate software convolved in JRiver MC and sent to Lynx Aurora 8 channel DAC and a DCX2496 for subs.
The best sound I ever had and very good sound overall IMHO.
Chris
listen to a 5 way system with sealed 2 subs, sealed 15" bass, sealed 10" midbass, JMLC350 horns with GPA388 mids and JMLC1000/Celestion 1425 tweeters.
Linear phase NT 2nd order crossovers made with Acourate software convolved in JRiver MC and sent to Lynx Aurora 8 channel DAC and a DCX2496 for subs.
The best sound I ever had and very good sound overall IMHO.
Chris
I think what you are trying to say is that people with an electronics background who have not tried to design passive systems often think LR4 high and low pass and jobs a goodun. As active gives several additional degrees of freedom to work with of course its more difficult to get right. It's also easier for those coming from electron herding to forget acoustic slopes.
That hybrid article reflects a number of discussions on the subject. BiAmp (Bi-Amplification - Not Quite Magic, But Close) - Part 1 for example and Linkwitz in the LX-521. I very much agree that BSC should be active, not least because it is directly related to room placement how much you need, and a sad waste of amplifier power.
I admire those who are good at the art with passive crossovers and can coax the required performance out of a system with careful iteration. I also despair at some of the brute force solutions to active out there. All of which is why I have been holding off on an active solution for 20 years.
(reposting here for help)
Think the combo here is underpowered...but is this ok to just get a feel of
active crossover ?
Eminence Beta CX12 and APT50 with Active XO
Planning to use xkitz Audio Amplifier, 30W w/ 2-Way Active Crossover [XAMP-M2] Audio Amplifier [XAMP-M2] : Xkitz Electronics, Electronic Kits, Fun Educational Electronic Projects ( Audio Amplifier, 30W w/ 2-Way Active Crossover [XAMP-M2] to drive the Eminence Beta CX12 and APT50.
for home hifi.
1.Enclosure as shown in eminence website and Kaiutinrakennusohje Yksisilmäiset veljekset - hifi-PA-kaiuttimet Eminence Beta-8CX, Beta-10CX ja Beta-12CX -koaksiaalielementeistä | AudioVideo.fi
2.Cut off at 3.5khz
Request experts to offer suggestions. Are there better active xo plus amp combo boards you recommend ?
Think the combo here is underpowered...but is this ok to just get a feel of
active crossover ?
Eminence Beta CX12 and APT50 with Active XO
Planning to use xkitz Audio Amplifier, 30W w/ 2-Way Active Crossover [XAMP-M2] Audio Amplifier [XAMP-M2] : Xkitz Electronics, Electronic Kits, Fun Educational Electronic Projects ( Audio Amplifier, 30W w/ 2-Way Active Crossover [XAMP-M2] to drive the Eminence Beta CX12 and APT50.
for home hifi.
1.Enclosure as shown in eminence website and Kaiutinrakennusohje Yksisilmäiset veljekset - hifi-PA-kaiuttimet Eminence Beta-8CX, Beta-10CX ja Beta-12CX -koaksiaalielementeistä | AudioVideo.fi
2.Cut off at 3.5khz
Request experts to offer suggestions. Are there better active xo plus amp combo boards you recommend ?
I've found that the more inexpensive digital actives--like the miniDSPs and other first generation of digital active crossovers--have subtle SQ and higher noise issues relative to more recent digital actives using better quality analog sections and 96 kHz sampling rate.
Physically time aligning horn-loaded loudspeakers usually comes at a high price due to issues with higher frequency horn mouths being partially obscured by bass bin mouths--which significantly degrade in-room polars of the HF horns, and the sometimes dramatically increased vertical separation of drivers/horns in order to achieve physical alignment introduces unwanted diffraction effects at the crossover regions--especially if using lower order crossover filter designs, and other less defined aural issues with having distributed loudspeaker drivers so far from each other. Having the ability to mount the horn mouths much closer together using digital delay counts for something in its own right. YMMV.
Chris
Last edited:
^^
The mid-bass and mid are in a Altec A7-500W cab, so the critical 500Hz
crossover and associated drivers are not providing interference with each
other. The high frequency driver is elevated, so also not affected. But I
agree, a cabinet such as a A7 is not commonly used, so most solutions
for physical alignment of horns would be difficult.
The mid-bass and mid are in a Altec A7-500W cab, so the critical 500Hz
crossover and associated drivers are not providing interference with each
other. The high frequency driver is elevated, so also not affected. But I
agree, a cabinet such as a A7 is not commonly used, so most solutions
for physical alignment of horns would be difficult.
Last edited:
There's more than one way to skin a cat - it might be stretching the consensus on definition of "active", but I'll pipe in anyway on what can be easily achieved with some of today's surround receivers - even the more costly of which represent to my thinking the best bang for buck in mainstream commercial home consumer products.
Specifically, Onkyo TX-NR818, but there are likely other higher end models by numerous makers that allow for it.
Many of these now contain at least 7 on-board amp channels, not all of which will necessarily be used in every set-up - I've yet to figure out how to sneak in the 3rd "pair - some have function for digital XO and assignment of unused channels ( front height/width, I think) for bi-amping of front mains.
I've done this a couple of times with some proto-type 2-ways, and it works quite well. As all my speakers happen to be wide-band "full-rangers" with no internal crossovers / filters, I'd call that an "active" system, but of course, others will debate that point.
Specifically, Onkyo TX-NR818, but there are likely other higher end models by numerous makers that allow for it.
Many of these now contain at least 7 on-board amp channels, not all of which will necessarily be used in every set-up - I've yet to figure out how to sneak in the 3rd "pair - some have function for digital XO and assignment of unused channels ( front height/width, I think) for bi-amping of front mains.
I've done this a couple of times with some proto-type 2-ways, and it works quite well. As all my speakers happen to be wide-band "full-rangers" with no internal crossovers / filters, I'd call that an "active" system, but of course, others will debate that point.
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.