I quite agree - having to buy a speaker with an internal passive XO already incorporated is about as much fun as having to buy a PC with Windows already installed. The suggested schematic though for the manufacturer recommended XO should be supplied, with full component specs and the voltage transfer functions.
I forsee DACs which can use downloaded coefficients to generate FRs matched to particular drive units in particular speakers. DIYing your own activation of a speaker would certainly be great for a spectrum of manufacturers.
Yes no longer the active speaker as a 'black box' - open source actives WTG
CopperTop you are assuming that the average person buying speakers will have the knowledge and inclination to actually set up an active crossover that will give them a good sound! Anyone with that Inclination would probably end up diying the whole thing
There are products already that do cater for this type of scenario though, for example the DSPre1 from holm accoustics, however I think it would be a pretty niche market.
Tony.
There are products already that do cater for this type of scenario though, for example the DSPre1 from holm accoustics, however I think it would be a pretty niche market.
Tony.
I've seen tons of speakers sold as active, just because they had build in amp's. But they filter was still passive.
I know that definitions can play tricks on most people and that it can help to sell more stuff to people who dont do their homework.
I have a fully active multiway system. And it takes a spdif signal, splits it into 8 channels, 4 for each sider (left right). I can ofcourse choose to use fx only 3 channels pr side, depending on the speaker I want to use. Then i run balanced cables to my multichannel amps, that are positioned next to each speaker. Her I have speak-on, like in pro-audio to connect the amp easyly to the speaker. The pre-amp, has both DAC, filter and digital contolled analog volume build in. All 8 channels can be adjusted individually, so that a tweeter with high sensitivity, easily can be leveled with a midrange, all without "loosing bits" in the digital domain. When level is set for all channels, then the volumecontrol used with remote, is ofcourse af mastervolume, that controls all 8 at same time.
I encountered no problems, as soon as I learned to measure and ajust parametres correctly.
First I made a standard pair of Dali evidence 870 active with this system. It was ALOT better than the standard edition. But I refitted the passive filter and sold them, cause the drivers and cabinet construction did not give me af chance to go far enough in the high end direction I wanted.
I have since build two different DIY speakers. first with SS 9900, Accuton T8 5" midrange, 8545 for midbas, and one 12" XXLS 830952 for sub.
Then I build the ones I have now. Morel Supreme, Accuton T8 5" midrange, 3x18W8545 for midbas, and 2x12" XXLS 830952 for subs, next to each speaker.
My experience, after listening to Wilson audio sophia, Dynaudio confidence, Peak consult Kepheus Ultimatum, B&W 800 series, and tons of other very expensive speakers, with equally expensive amps, costing around 18.000$ for the power amp alone. Is that I come close enough here at home with good standard drivers, simple and well build class B amps, well constructed cabinets and som simple room acoustics, and of course a well tempered DSP x-over.
I use a cheap Behringe ECM8000 microfone, and it gives me a nice view of the most critical places in the frequency range. Like the one between midrange and tweeter, that is very important for good music reproduction. Then it is not that essential that the microfone is not perfect in the range over 8K hz or below 2-300. Speakers are measured aprox 1 meter away, straight on the baffle. I then measure in the listening spot, to correct the bass according to the room.
No matter what type of system you use, It is important to adjust filter, speaker placement and room acoustics correctly to make it all sum up. Or else you are just guessing . And we all know how easy the mind and ears are to be deceived - take for example cable test's.
Feel free to ask. I'm just a DIY, that like to form my own opinion, from what I experience.
I know that definitions can play tricks on most people and that it can help to sell more stuff to people who dont do their homework.
I have a fully active multiway system. And it takes a spdif signal, splits it into 8 channels, 4 for each sider (left right). I can ofcourse choose to use fx only 3 channels pr side, depending on the speaker I want to use. Then i run balanced cables to my multichannel amps, that are positioned next to each speaker. Her I have speak-on, like in pro-audio to connect the amp easyly to the speaker. The pre-amp, has both DAC, filter and digital contolled analog volume build in. All 8 channels can be adjusted individually, so that a tweeter with high sensitivity, easily can be leveled with a midrange, all without "loosing bits" in the digital domain. When level is set for all channels, then the volumecontrol used with remote, is ofcourse af mastervolume, that controls all 8 at same time.
I encountered no problems, as soon as I learned to measure and ajust parametres correctly.
First I made a standard pair of Dali evidence 870 active with this system. It was ALOT better than the standard edition. But I refitted the passive filter and sold them, cause the drivers and cabinet construction did not give me af chance to go far enough in the high end direction I wanted.
I have since build two different DIY speakers. first with SS 9900, Accuton T8 5" midrange, 8545 for midbas, and one 12" XXLS 830952 for sub.
Then I build the ones I have now. Morel Supreme, Accuton T8 5" midrange, 3x18W8545 for midbas, and 2x12" XXLS 830952 for subs, next to each speaker.
My experience, after listening to Wilson audio sophia, Dynaudio confidence, Peak consult Kepheus Ultimatum, B&W 800 series, and tons of other very expensive speakers, with equally expensive amps, costing around 18.000$ for the power amp alone. Is that I come close enough here at home with good standard drivers, simple and well build class B amps, well constructed cabinets and som simple room acoustics, and of course a well tempered DSP x-over.
I use a cheap Behringe ECM8000 microfone, and it gives me a nice view of the most critical places in the frequency range. Like the one between midrange and tweeter, that is very important for good music reproduction. Then it is not that essential that the microfone is not perfect in the range over 8K hz or below 2-300. Speakers are measured aprox 1 meter away, straight on the baffle. I then measure in the listening spot, to correct the bass according to the room.
No matter what type of system you use, It is important to adjust filter, speaker placement and room acoustics correctly to make it all sum up. Or else you are just guessing . And we all know how easy the mind and ears are to be deceived - take for example cable test's.
Feel free to ask. I'm just a DIY, that like to form my own opinion, from what I experience.
Last edited:
CopperTop you are assuming that the average person buying speakers will have the knowledge and inclination to actually set up an active crossover that will give them a good sound! Anyone with that Inclination would probably end up diying the whole thing
No, that's not the market I was thinking of. Think more 'Ikea' style self-assembly or packet cake mixes. Those aren't really niche at all but quite possibly they did start out that way.
might help to tell why you want us to look at that speaker, instead of just posting link, please
tho I do see why, its not really that obvious
Then they are active speakers.
Honestly, I don't like this terminology, even if it is domestic. It is confusing, artificial. Call me anti-patriot, but I prefer international terminology accepted by the outside of the forum world.
To me 'active' means line level xover and one amp per driver.
The amps can be either built into the box which is usual with smaller models or in a rack somewhere else which is usual with larger models.
For example ATC make an all active range of monitors. On the models up to the SCM150 the amps are onboard while with the big SCM200 and 300 the amps are outboard.
Just to complicate things further PMC make something they call 'activated'. These use passive high level crossovers with a single onboard amp.
They also make active ones with line level crossover and one amp per driver.
Semantics, semantics...
That's a "field coil speaker"
That's a "motional feedback speaker"... did you like the bass response?
That's a "field coil speaker"
What I would call "Active", what I did 30 years ago, experimenting with feedback by acceleration. I glued a piezo crysal to the edge of the coil, with JFET source follower, tuned the system perfectly so it was flat from something like 5 Hz, and it was impossible to push the cone by hand when it was on. Later I put a vinyl disk with organ music recorded, and the amp trying to reproduce eccentric disk output with adequate sound pressure level spit out the cone.
That's a "motional feedback speaker"... did you like the bass response?
CopperTop, many speakers do have this option. Mainly pro speakers. Many high end speakers have the option for passive biamping, which means that you have separate terminals for the LF and HF parts of the crossover.
These are my speakers' connectors (Technics SB-1000)
An externally hosted image should be here but it was not working when we last tested it.
BTW: Anatoliy, i assume you read russian, so you perhaps may like this article on the SB-1000 and its bass response compared to some other speakers:
Ëó÷øèé áàñ â ìèðå
Mine are connected as follows:
line source -> dbx 234xs crossover (2-way) --> LOW, HIGH
LOW --> 70W class AB amp --> direct to woofer
HIGH --> 10W class A amp --> speaker passive crossover --> sqwawker, tweeter
I've modified the internal crossover so it only serves to divide the sqwawker from the tweeter (low pass filter, high pass filter, respectively.)
Last edited:
Semantics, semantics...
That's a "field coil speaker"
Yes. And it is powered, but passive.
And motional feedback speaker can't be passive.
Did I like flat frequency response, or did I like distortions generated by speakers flapping like butterfly's wings?
A few comments
I am only talking 2 channel audio in what follows and although this is a thread focusing on active vs passive crossovers, I ask you to please bear with me. Also, before I begin I will tell you that I am mid-50's, listen to live rock/hard rock/blues/indie/folk music and spend almost as much time at festivals and gigs listening to the real thing as to artificial Hi-Fi. I therefore have a reference as to what I am seeking and am by no means a clinical hi-fi nerd only listening to the system itself. (in my case, seeking to reproduce musicality, timing, live slam, impact and dynamics with no distortion whatsoever...occasionally a live performance achieves that, often not). I get great pleasure from music in the car, mp3, the radio - whenever I am on my own, I listen to whatever format is at hand.
Now.... Be honest folks, how many times have you read or heard so-called experts talking about "3D imaging, holographic soundstaging etc etc" and thought, 'this must be imagined bull***t - it just isn't possible'. I certainly have and the high-end audio hobby in my opinion contains a lot of that.
My system (in excess of £20k) always sounded great but even Shahinian Obelisks in a dedicated music room never managed more than a great 2D sound, vinyl or digital. At the same time, with concrete walls and carpeted solid floor, it was a little clinical and cold. Even adding large/powerful M&K and B&W subs manged to create plenty of slam but also occasionally a sudden bass hump on certain recordings at certain frequencies. I was using a clever little M&K passive crossover box at ~80hz, feeding only mid-treble to the Shahinians, the rest to the subs, so they had quite a satisfying hard-hitting punch with little bass to muddy things in the main speakers.
I purchased and have used a DEQX HDP-3 for several months now, initially with the Obelisks (including inbuilt passive crossovers of course) and now with home built OB speakers using only DEQX active crossovers. Both speaker types were/are crossed at 100hz with the subs in the positions that trial and error had already determined as optimal for the cleanest in-room bass.
All have been calibrated using proper and careful outdoor measurements and after learning how to use the DEQX optimally, I can confidently give an opinion based on my own experience of Active Digital crossovers and much more.
One Friday night after using the DEQX for a week or so, the 9 yr old Shahinians suddenly sounded incredibly 'real' for the first time and this was a shock, using active 36db LR crossovers to the subs. After calibration and room correction it was nothing like my familiar old system and considerably better than I have ever heard anywhere, Hi-Fi demo rooms, exhibitions etc, regardless of cost or equipment. I thought I knew these speakers pretty well but actually swore out loud the first time I managed to fully time align the subs with the mains, it was that good. A friend who heard before-during & after described it as the effect of focusing a lens, suddenly it snaps into place, a great and accurate analogy. A 'perfect' crossover to subs and room correction completely eliminated the boom and the time/phase alignment meant a more dynamic and certainly cleaner sound. Totally in focus but, being honest, it still didn't sound much more 'holographic'. Oh well I thought, I'm happy to leave it at that but I will try making some Open Baffles as everyone seems to think they do something special... Ribbon tweeter + 4 x mid-bass drivers each, d'appolito style, all researched and purchased from that incredibly helpful and knowledgeable man, Ivan at IPL UK. The tweeters and mids are driven by separate 200w power amps, both subs have their own 200w/400w supplies.
Now I have spent 2 weeks with the completed OB's, creating digital crossovers, calibrated flat, correcting/time aligning the subs and trying combinations of filters/slopes..... my humble creations considerably blow the Shahinians away. This is NOT bull***t and anyone living in the NW of England is more than welcome to come and hear for themselves. Plenty of friends have done so, all giving similarly 'blown-away' comments. My local Hi-Fi dealer even said 'where do you go from here?'! (Probably nowhere until there's at least an HDP-5 or I purchase an earthworks mic to replace the Behrlinger used to calibrate, set up and measure)
The subs crossover at 100hz 48db, with one at 90deg polarity to the mains and the other at 180 deg (they are angled differently in the room). This came from careful listening. I have compared LR filters at 12, 24, 36, 48, 60 and 72db and 48 just sounds 'right'. The second sub and mains are minutely time aligned to the furthest (distance from seat) sub. I also have a very steep Linear crossover (in excess of 200db) between midranges and ribbon tweeters - crossed over at 3200khz.
Several friends and acquaintences have heard this latest incarnation and all agree at a phenominal result....and AT LAST sounding holographic, slightly beyond the speaker width-wise, no taller than they are but recessing way beyond the back of the room. Finally I can hear that 'space' around and between performers and instruments that you read about and it is easy to identify the type of acoustic space the original recording was made in. Totally addictive and if I didn't have the best wife in the world, the time I am now spending listening to my music collection would probably destroy my 32 year marriage! One of my best friends is even convinced I am pulling a trick with other hidden speakers because he says the realism and 'placement' is literally impossible with 2 speakers and I also must have paid someone to design them.
I know this is a 'crossover' topic and sorry to give such a rambling diatribe but I am happy to report that the combination of crossover, time, phase alignment and everything else has achieved something magical. It sounds more musical, analogue, dynamic and punchy than I ever thought I could achieve and so far, nobody who has heard it disagrees. I am convinced that with interest, persistence and patience, anyone who has an inquisitive, open mind can achieve spectacular results with such a device. If they don’t, just pay the manufacturer in Australia to set it up remotely for you, probably even better than I have been able to achieve. It has also been an incredible ‘fun’ learning experience.
Now, I await the inevitable barrage of sceptical comment - remember I was 'one of you' until I got this marvel of a device. Please keep an open mind like I did and just because you haven't heard of or listened to this, don’t dismiss it as digital corruption to the pure analogue ‘art’. My in-room sound was sometimes a nightmare before, now it is as smooth as silk. I just wish I had done this several years ago. Relistening to a thousand or so LPs and at least 3000 CDs are going to be a hell of a pleasure….. if I manage to live that long but at least I’m smiling all the way.
I am only talking 2 channel audio in what follows and although this is a thread focusing on active vs passive crossovers, I ask you to please bear with me. Also, before I begin I will tell you that I am mid-50's, listen to live rock/hard rock/blues/indie/folk music and spend almost as much time at festivals and gigs listening to the real thing as to artificial Hi-Fi. I therefore have a reference as to what I am seeking and am by no means a clinical hi-fi nerd only listening to the system itself. (in my case, seeking to reproduce musicality, timing, live slam, impact and dynamics with no distortion whatsoever...occasionally a live performance achieves that, often not). I get great pleasure from music in the car, mp3, the radio - whenever I am on my own, I listen to whatever format is at hand.
Now.... Be honest folks, how many times have you read or heard so-called experts talking about "3D imaging, holographic soundstaging etc etc" and thought, 'this must be imagined bull***t - it just isn't possible'. I certainly have and the high-end audio hobby in my opinion contains a lot of that.
My system (in excess of £20k) always sounded great but even Shahinian Obelisks in a dedicated music room never managed more than a great 2D sound, vinyl or digital. At the same time, with concrete walls and carpeted solid floor, it was a little clinical and cold. Even adding large/powerful M&K and B&W subs manged to create plenty of slam but also occasionally a sudden bass hump on certain recordings at certain frequencies. I was using a clever little M&K passive crossover box at ~80hz, feeding only mid-treble to the Shahinians, the rest to the subs, so they had quite a satisfying hard-hitting punch with little bass to muddy things in the main speakers.
I purchased and have used a DEQX HDP-3 for several months now, initially with the Obelisks (including inbuilt passive crossovers of course) and now with home built OB speakers using only DEQX active crossovers. Both speaker types were/are crossed at 100hz with the subs in the positions that trial and error had already determined as optimal for the cleanest in-room bass.
All have been calibrated using proper and careful outdoor measurements and after learning how to use the DEQX optimally, I can confidently give an opinion based on my own experience of Active Digital crossovers and much more.
One Friday night after using the DEQX for a week or so, the 9 yr old Shahinians suddenly sounded incredibly 'real' for the first time and this was a shock, using active 36db LR crossovers to the subs. After calibration and room correction it was nothing like my familiar old system and considerably better than I have ever heard anywhere, Hi-Fi demo rooms, exhibitions etc, regardless of cost or equipment. I thought I knew these speakers pretty well but actually swore out loud the first time I managed to fully time align the subs with the mains, it was that good. A friend who heard before-during & after described it as the effect of focusing a lens, suddenly it snaps into place, a great and accurate analogy. A 'perfect' crossover to subs and room correction completely eliminated the boom and the time/phase alignment meant a more dynamic and certainly cleaner sound. Totally in focus but, being honest, it still didn't sound much more 'holographic'. Oh well I thought, I'm happy to leave it at that but I will try making some Open Baffles as everyone seems to think they do something special... Ribbon tweeter + 4 x mid-bass drivers each, d'appolito style, all researched and purchased from that incredibly helpful and knowledgeable man, Ivan at IPL UK. The tweeters and mids are driven by separate 200w power amps, both subs have their own 200w/400w supplies.
Now I have spent 2 weeks with the completed OB's, creating digital crossovers, calibrated flat, correcting/time aligning the subs and trying combinations of filters/slopes..... my humble creations considerably blow the Shahinians away. This is NOT bull***t and anyone living in the NW of England is more than welcome to come and hear for themselves. Plenty of friends have done so, all giving similarly 'blown-away' comments. My local Hi-Fi dealer even said 'where do you go from here?'! (Probably nowhere until there's at least an HDP-5 or I purchase an earthworks mic to replace the Behrlinger used to calibrate, set up and measure)
The subs crossover at 100hz 48db, with one at 90deg polarity to the mains and the other at 180 deg (they are angled differently in the room). This came from careful listening. I have compared LR filters at 12, 24, 36, 48, 60 and 72db and 48 just sounds 'right'. The second sub and mains are minutely time aligned to the furthest (distance from seat) sub. I also have a very steep Linear crossover (in excess of 200db) between midranges and ribbon tweeters - crossed over at 3200khz.
Several friends and acquaintences have heard this latest incarnation and all agree at a phenominal result....and AT LAST sounding holographic, slightly beyond the speaker width-wise, no taller than they are but recessing way beyond the back of the room. Finally I can hear that 'space' around and between performers and instruments that you read about and it is easy to identify the type of acoustic space the original recording was made in. Totally addictive and if I didn't have the best wife in the world, the time I am now spending listening to my music collection would probably destroy my 32 year marriage! One of my best friends is even convinced I am pulling a trick with other hidden speakers because he says the realism and 'placement' is literally impossible with 2 speakers and I also must have paid someone to design them.
I know this is a 'crossover' topic and sorry to give such a rambling diatribe but I am happy to report that the combination of crossover, time, phase alignment and everything else has achieved something magical. It sounds more musical, analogue, dynamic and punchy than I ever thought I could achieve and so far, nobody who has heard it disagrees. I am convinced that with interest, persistence and patience, anyone who has an inquisitive, open mind can achieve spectacular results with such a device. If they don’t, just pay the manufacturer in Australia to set it up remotely for you, probably even better than I have been able to achieve. It has also been an incredible ‘fun’ learning experience.
Now, I await the inevitable barrage of sceptical comment - remember I was 'one of you' until I got this marvel of a device. Please keep an open mind like I did and just because you haven't heard of or listened to this, don’t dismiss it as digital corruption to the pure analogue ‘art’. My in-room sound was sometimes a nightmare before, now it is as smooth as silk. I just wish I had done this several years ago. Relistening to a thousand or so LPs and at least 3000 CDs are going to be a hell of a pleasure….. if I manage to live that long but at least I’m smiling all the way.
Drewan, you have just explained how active crossovers are easier to get right than passive. A point I and others have already made. It could be that your speakers would require a passive crossover of such complexity and cost that it would not be worth it, but that does not condemn the passive approach.
I went from active (DSP) to passive and found even more 3D than I had before, subtle, but real. Advantage passive? Probably not, just some small differences that worked to my advantage. I'll take.
FWIW, don't the big Tannoys have a "Drivers only" connection in the back? One can use their built in or your own external crossover.
I went from active (DSP) to passive and found even more 3D than I had before, subtle, but real. Advantage passive? Probably not, just some small differences that worked to my advantage. I'll take.
FWIW, don't the big Tannoys have a "Drivers only" connection in the back? One can use their built in or your own external crossover.
Thanks for your comments Pano, I think the point I am making is that the time alignment and phasing achieved with DEQX has probably made as much difference as the crossovers themselves because the Obelisks are already great speakers. But when I measured and calibrated them outdoors, I was amazed firstly how closely matched they were L-R in the measured response but also, with so many drivers/crossovers, how good they already sounded. Having said that, once DEQX calibrated and still using all the passive internal crossovers, they moved into a completely higher plane, almost a night-day difference. The DEQX completely aligns everything at all calibrated frequencies for a flat response and believe me I have heard some pretty exotic speakers/systems, nothing comes close to what I've now got. Very happy indeed
Yes, I have a similar set-up, but a bit cruder than your DEQX.
I use a Berhinger DEQ in front of the amp to shape the response in my listening room. It makes a big difference, in a good way. Time and phase I used to do in the DSP crossover, but now do with driver position and passive crossover. Both work, and are essential for great results, as you have found. I have the luxury of being able to move my drivers relative to each other, many people do not.
My in room response generally follows the B&K listening curve, I.E. a gently falling response from ~400Hz to 20Khz. -6dB at the top end. My tweeters conk out about 17K, but that's the general curve.
I use a Berhinger DEQ in front of the amp to shape the response in my listening room. It makes a big difference, in a good way. Time and phase I used to do in the DSP crossover, but now do with driver position and passive crossover. Both work, and are essential for great results, as you have found. I have the luxury of being able to move my drivers relative to each other, many people do not.
My in room response generally follows the B&K listening curve, I.E. a gently falling response from ~400Hz to 20Khz. -6dB at the top end. My tweeters conk out about 17K, but that's the general curve.
Sorry... got it now
I just tried to mention another pair of commercially available speakers (XTZ 99.38), that came with 3 pairs of binding post at the rear and a seperate passive filter, so that you could change it easily or use active filter and seperate amp for each driver.
The reason i did not provide anything else than the link, was because Planet10(Dave) wrote this: "Linn has been doing that since the 70s"
As a response to Coppertop, that wrote this:
" Speakers could be sold with a few extra 4mm sockets and link pieces on the back, allowing the user to select the drivers-only option."
Using multiple amplifiers is not a strong argument for active crossovers except for a professional application where every last decibel you can squeeze out of a sound reinforcement system counts at the bottom line. First order passive bandwidth limiting is easily achieved before each amp in a multi-amped speaker, and the speaker drivers can then either be driven directly from the amplifier or with their multiamp passive xover components in place.
Also, I have never heard an A/D/A process or solid state line level circuit (which themselves use, guess what, resistors, capacitors and even the odd inductor with the obligatory sandy amplification devices) that was nearly as transparent as decent quality passive capacitors, inductors and resistors used directly in an xover.
There are actually distortion advantages for many drivers to be driven from a higher than zero ohm impedance, such as reductions in flux modulation distortion and thermal compression.
And I have designed and implemented passive xovers that provide a voltage gain of as much as 10db at the speaker terminals over critical bandwidths compared to the amplifier terminals. Try doing that with any purely active xover.
Also, I have never heard an A/D/A process or solid state line level circuit (which themselves use, guess what, resistors, capacitors and even the odd inductor with the obligatory sandy amplification devices) that was nearly as transparent as decent quality passive capacitors, inductors and resistors used directly in an xover.
There are actually distortion advantages for many drivers to be driven from a higher than zero ohm impedance, such as reductions in flux modulation distortion and thermal compression.
And I have designed and implemented passive xovers that provide a voltage gain of as much as 10db at the speaker terminals over critical bandwidths compared to the amplifier terminals. Try doing that with any purely active xover.
Last edited:
- Status
- This old topic is closed. If you want to reopen this topic, contact a moderator using the "Report Post" button.