Another Approach to Determining Crossover Points

[rb132333]

Since I don't have the resources (at this point) to go all in on obtaining a full loudspeaker testing set-up, I was wondering if anyone tried this approach; purchase something like the Behringer CX3400 active crossover a few small power amps and a pre-amp and attempt to determine an accurate crossover point by experimentation (by ear). Is this a feasible approach? It seems like this approach would not be very expensive and it would also allow you to utilize it as a active system.

[DrDyna]

I think a lot of folks do exactly that. If you've got frequency responses from the manufacturer so you can avoid resonances and breakup modes and adjust for sensitivities, it'll probably work fairly well.

[Pano]

Yes, a lot of folks do this. But if you want to do it "really right" you'll use something like the DCX2496 which will allow you to set different slopes/orders and underlap or overlap the points. That can be very important to advanced crossover design.

With the CX3400 I think you can spread the frequencies some, but you'll always be stuck with L/R 4th order. If that's what you want, then no problem. And it's much faster.

[planet10]

Originally Posted by Pano

... use something like the DCX2496 which will allow you to set different slopes/orders and underlap or overlap the points.

The DCX is indeed very useful for this. If you haven't turfed the analog sections thou, you'll still need measure kit, because it is something only a mic can listen too (at least the 2 i have heard -- no Michael, my trafos still reside on the shelf )

dave

[mpa]

DCX is a very good way to do this but preferably with measurement gear. Are you intending to find crossover points and then build a passive crossover as I would strongly suggest keeping the DCX and running active..
I would never go back to passive since going active!!

[Cal Weldon]

If you do decide to go active then you can go with the CX3400 or CX2310

[Charles Darwin]

I'd also recommend staying active.

I even think that active with cheap&cheerful (as opposed to cheap&nasty) amps will sound better than passive with an expensive amp.
In an active setup an amp with a damping factor of 70 would have probably more control over the driver than an amp with a DF of 400 or more in a passive one.

[Andersonix]

Sure it can be done (and probably should be tried at least once as an exercise), but there's a real possibility of your excitable and fickle brain leading you very astray and into Bose territory.... (but having a 'reference' loudspeaker to target might help keep things manageable)

[Pano]

Ain't that the truth, Anderson! So many choices can drive you mad. You'll end up tweaking for years. Of course I wouldn't know about that.

I've just gone back to a passive crossover from my modified DCX and am very happy. Not tempted to go back to active.

[Arty]

there is some software that can manipulate soudcard outputs to act as a simple programmable active crossvoer, and can do lvl adjustment, and different slopes, yadada.

you can use it to find nice crossover point, but afterwards building a passive xover based on it.. will be quite different. as passive crossover elements tend to be more tha what one needs