Audiophile active crossover - Page 3 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Source & Line > Analog Line Level
Home Forums Rules Articles diyAudio Store Gallery Wiki Blogs Register Donations FAQ Calendar Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Analog Line Level Preamplifiers , Passive Pre-amps, Crossovers, etc.

Please consider donating to help us continue to serve you.

Ads on/off / Custom Title / More PMs / More album space / Advanced printing & mass image saving
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 4th March 2013, 01:54 AM   #21
diyAudio Member
abraxalito's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Hangzhou - Marco Polo's 'most beautiful city'. 700yrs is a long time though...
Blog Entries: 145
Send a message via Yahoo to abraxalito
I'm currently designing a passive (LC) line level crossover coz I'm hopeful it'll sound better than an active one. Inductors and capacitors I reckon have lower IMD than semiconductors but the proof will be in the listening.
The heart ... first dictates the conclusion, then commands the head to provide the reasoning that will defend it. Anthony de Mello
  Reply With Quote
Old 4th March 2013, 09:01 PM   #22
bimo is offline bimo  Indonesia
diyAudio Member
bimo's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Depok, West of Java
Theoretically, passive crossover has lower noise result. But active crossover is greater flexibility in implementation. If they both were implemented properly, it will be give a good result. It all depend on implementation.
  Reply With Quote
Old 5th March 2013, 02:48 AM   #23
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Simcoe Ont
About the 4 ways, How would Dynaudio 30W54 integrate with D28/2 and MW160. In a Triamped system with 11", would I still need a subwoofer? I really like the direction my system is going but I was offered the Dynaudio 30W54 for a good price and I don't see them alot around here.
  Reply With Quote
Old 7th March 2013, 04:14 PM   #24
diyAudio Member
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Gävle
Send a message via MSN to siouxiebuff
The way I see it is that passive filtering is superior to active, but only if you can design and make your own custom drivers.
And don't blame active filters for tendencies to use textbook style designs. Thats just poor imagination.
  Reply With Quote
Old 14th March 2013, 02:17 PM   #25
bimo is offline bimo  Indonesia
diyAudio Member
bimo's Avatar
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Depok, West of Java
I have already modified active crossover of cheap multimedia speaker. The speaker use bi-amp, but do not properly implemented the active crossover. The high pass filter and low pass filter specification of the active crossover must be depend on the characteristic of the woofer and tweeter.

I just modify the Q and the frequency cut-off of the filter, and it give better sounding speaker .
  Reply With Quote


Hide this!Advertise here!
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

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

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Active Crossover: Behringer x DBX active DriveRack 260 murillollirum Multi-Way 21 9th February 2013 07:12 AM
DIY Audiophile Series: How to Make Your Own Audiophile Quality 300B Valve Amp (4DVD) scav Swap Meet 1 12th October 2009 03:14 PM
Behringer crossover audiophile quality, bi/tri amping stereo speakers? cirrus18 Multi-Way 25 29th December 2008 12:55 PM
Passive crossover into active crossover hahfran Multi-Way 16 10th February 2008 06:16 PM
XVR1 active crossover, discrete active stage promitheus Pass Labs 18 22nd July 2002 01:29 AM

New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 04:50 PM.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright ©1999-2017 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2