From passive to active filter - Page 4 - diyAudio
Go Back   Home > Forums > Loudspeakers > Multi-Way

Multi-Way Conventional loudspeakers with crossovers

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
Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 21st February 2013, 10:52 AM   #31
terry j is offline terry j  Australia
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Quote:
Originally Posted by soren5 View Post
But shouldn't we begin to see more active proven designs then?
hey, dunno. good question, never thought about it.

heck, just had a minutes thought, no good answers popped up! History? 'the way things have always gone'?

OR, just take a design that has already worked out a driver selection that would work together, get your measurement gear out and put in the filters that give you what you want? Flat on axis, whatever.

anyway, I think others might have some ideas on that. good question.
  Reply With Quote
Old 21st February 2013, 11:47 AM   #32
AllenB is offline AllenB  Australia
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by soren5 View Post
Active and passive XO designs work differently and each have their own advantages and drawbacks, I see that now. So duplicating a passive design with an active doesn't make much sense I guess.
From the point of view of this thread, yes... but from mine there is so much else to designing a crossover which is common ground. The question of passive vs active is just one of implementation, like deciding which brand of nails to use when you're designing a house (so I guess MiniDSP is like a gas fired nail gun )
Quote:
Originally Posted by terry j View Post
See you in oct allen??
I hope so. Could you give me a bell then? (I'm subscribed to your thread)
  Reply With Quote
Old 21st February 2013, 09:01 PM   #33
terry j is offline terry j  Australia
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Not sure which thread you mean allen, but yeah I should remember when we start adding up 'who is coming this year?'. A dim spark should ignite from somewhere.

we usually end up 'testing something' each year, next was supposed to be 'can we really hear cap differences in a power amp', were going to do a blind test with some of the more vocal 'I can hear differences between wire types in an amp' but they seem to have spat the dummy and it's looking tenuous. I'm not that upset to be frank, the idea of having ten golden ears walking around kinda gave me the heebie jeebies.

SO, long story short, if you have any ideas of what might make an interesting thing to investigate this year throw em into the pot. I am thinking 'why not just a good old dac comparison'...but done blind via instant switching from the LP.

That might throw a spanner into the works of the 'oh my god, every dac is sooo different' and the true relative differences start to emerge.
  Reply With Quote
Old 21st February 2013, 09:49 PM   #34
diyAudio Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Quote:
Originally Posted by soren5 View Post
But shouldn't we begin to see more active proven designs then? I mean, there will always be DIY'ers out there with superior measurement equipment and XO designer skills, who will make great filter designs, passive or active. And if more people in the DIY speaker community are going active, then active proven designs should start to show up, no? (Maybe they already are and I just haven't noticed )
A very real problem with active filters is that using different types of DSP results in differing output response even when all the crossover types, slopes, frequencies, and parametric filters are set the same.

As Bennett Prescott puts it, "the DSP tower of Babel".

Simply put, if I design a crossover using "X" DSP, and a DIY uses those settings on "Y" DSP, they will not measure or sound the same.
The differences may be subtle or gross, the more filters employed the farther off the end results will be.

Even different models under the same parent company often don't match up.
In addition to "Q" variations, there are plain stupid design errors- for instance the DBX DriverackPa inverts polarity between input and output, no big deal when used alone, but the DriveRackPA+ inverts only the midrange outputs.

If someone correctly designed a crossover on that unit, the midrange would be reversed polarity using the same settings on any other "normal" DSP.

Art

Last edited by weltersys; 21st February 2013 at 09:51 PM.
  Reply With Quote

Reply


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
DAC output filter...passive or active? soundnovice miniDSP 4 14th June 2012 10:05 AM
active filter from rod elliot and sub filter questions wuffer Parts 0 2nd October 2005 01:12 PM
dB loss by using passive crossovers? Active vs Passive and 1st vs 4th order Hybrid fourdoor Multi-Way 3 11th July 2004 09:16 PM
passive filter for sub moi Multi-Way 34 28th July 2003 02:12 PM


New To Site? Need Help?

All times are GMT. The time now is 02:29 PM.


vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.
Copyright 1999-2014 diyAudio

Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.3.2