Can you use a digital active crossover to design a passive analog crossover ?

[RickDangerous]

Originally Posted by counter culture

We can only hope not.

Heck i have a lot to learn.

[qusp]

didnt you say these were for studio monitors? why the hell would you want the tubes to colour the sound? that would mean your digital crossover setting was correcting for errors created by the amplifier, as well as the speaker and if you moved to a different, less colored amplifier, the crossover would be all wrong. it would also mean that your recordings would exhibit the opposite coloration if you mixed them to be neutral using the colored amplification

[RickDangerous]

Originally Posted by qusp

didnt you say these were for studio monitors? why the hell would you want the tubes to colour the sound? that would mean your digital crossover setting was correcting for errors created by the amplifier, as well as the speaker and if you moved to a different, less colored amplifier, the crossover would be all wrong. it would also mean that your recordings would exhibit the opposite coloration if you mixed them to be neutral using the colored amplification

I see what you mean, but it's not necessarily so IMO. If you use your monitors every day for listening all day long to CDs etc, as i do, then you are used to their sound and so you will mix your own material according to what other CDs sound like anyway. It could translate fine, therefore.
Also, the Dared amp seems pretty clean and flat, as do many tube amps i believe, but now we know why the Dared is like that anyway. ;-)

I will probably sell the Dared & go with a Hypex kit.

[GoatGuy]

Originally Posted by RickDangerous

Also, the Dared amp seems pretty clean and flat, as do many tube amps i believe, but now we know why the Dared is like that anyway. ;-)

I will probably sell the Dared & go with a Hypex kit.

Beware of GAS

Gear Aquisition Syndrome ... it is an almost psychological compulsion disorder! It ruins relationships! Its a mate-breaker! It leads to unaccountable piles of discarded-but-not-quite-let-go-of equipment hanging around your crib!

I often recommend to people who are really interested in getting damned fine sound on the cheap (in the bi-amped or tri-amped world), to just break down and buy, used, on E-Bay, as many Alesys RA-100 amps as you like. They're dirt cheap compared to their original price, and the amplifiers are pure gold if they're working. I've now bought over 8 of 'em. They may not be rated for many output watts ... but they seem to have remarkable musical headroom, and easily (by oscilloscope) can produce ±50V output swings. At ~$99 each, you can get 6 channels for under $300, if you look around. And... to think ... in the future, if they work and you want to get rid of them, again you'll get the $99 out of each one.

Think about it.

GoatGuy

[GoatGuy]

Also, one last thought: You might want to settle on just "bi-amped", but go ahead and have 3 cones per speaker. The type of crossover you need to separate the HF response for an efficient tweeter from the midrange is very compact, small, inexpensive and musical even with fairly common components. The separation of the bass though... that's where the big $ come into play. So, if that can be done in FRONT (before amplification), and a total of 4 channels are used (B, M+H) x 2 ... then you'll see your finest sound, while optimizing the expense. Moreover, at some point you always can build the crossover to extract out the bass if you want to go back to 1 channel. Make it an external box to the speakers, and you keep "freedom of choice", without having to rewire them all the time.

GoatGuy

[RickDangerous]

Originally Posted by GoatGuy

Beware of GAS

Gear Aquisition Syndrome ... it is an almost psychological compulsion disorder! It ruins relationships! Its a mate-breaker! It leads to unaccountable piles of discarded-but-not-quite-let-go-of equipment hanging around your crib!

I often recommend to people who are really interested in getting damned fine sound on the cheap (in the bi-amped or tri-amped world), to just break down and buy, used, on E-Bay, as many Alesys RA-100 amps as you like. They're dirt cheap compared to their original price, and the amplifiers are pure gold if they're working. I've now bought over 8 of 'em. They may not be rated for many output watts ... but they seem to have remarkable musical headroom, and easily (by oscilloscope) can produce ±50V output swings. At ~$99 each, you can get 6 channels for under $300, if you look around. And... to think ... in the future, if they work and you want to get rid of them, again you'll get the $99 out of each one.

Think about it.

GoatGuy

Thanks a lot, GoatGuy (that is a weird name, btw) ;-)
I've checked it out, the reviews are pretty damn good for something that price. Shame they are so heavy...shipping could prove expensive. But i'll try to bring some over from Europe or get some shipped here.

[RickDangerous]

Originally Posted by GoatGuy

Beware of GAS

Gear Aquisition Syndrome ... it is an almost psychological compulsion disorder! It ruins relationships! Its a mate-breaker! It leads to unaccountable piles of discarded-but-not-quite-let-go-of equipment hanging around your crib!

I often recommend to people who are really interested in getting damned fine sound on the cheap (in the bi-amped or tri-amped world), to just break down and buy, used, on E-Bay, as many Alesys RA-100 amps as you like. They're dirt cheap compared to their original price, and the amplifiers are pure gold if they're working. I've now bought over 8 of 'em. They may not be rated for many output watts ... but they seem to have remarkable musical headroom, and easily (by oscilloscope) can produce ±50V output swings. At ~$99 each, you can get 6 channels for under $300, if you look around. And... to think ... in the future, if they work and you want to get rid of them, again you'll get the $99 out of each one.

Think about it.

GoatGuy

I would imagine that such a cheap amp could easily be modded too, right ?

[RickDangerous]

Originally Posted by GoatGuy

Also, one last thought: You might want to settle on just "bi-amped", but go ahead and have 3 cones per speaker. The type of crossover you need to separate the HF response for an efficient tweeter from the midrange is very compact, small, inexpensive and musical even with fairly common components. The separation of the bass though... that's where the big $ come into play. So, if that can be done in FRONT (before amplification), and a total of 4 channels are used (B, M+H) x 2 ... then you'll see your finest sound, while optimizing the expense. Moreover, at some point you always can build the crossover to extract out the bass if you want to go back to 1 channel. Make it an external box to the speakers, and you keep "freedom of choice", without having to rewire them all the time.

GoatGuy

Ok, so you're suggesting that i use an active digital filter for the bass (before the amp) and one amp for M+H with a passive analog filter.
Reduces the amp cost significantly, so that's great. And if it can work well like that then fine.
But my goal, ultimately, is to end up with a full passive crossover, inside the speaker or not (doesn't matter as long as it works), and use the digital crossover to start a design of other speakers.

How much does a decent 3 way analog passive crossover cost in components, roughly ? Can i build something good for say 150$ per speaker (if i get it all right, of course) ? Or is that too cheap ?
Reminder: the drivers will be at PMC IB1S level or higher, in terms of quality.

Thanks

[GoatGuy]

Cost. Cost... Cost???

Sigh, o yes, money. Actually you can do quite well for $100 or so a speaker. Oh, it won't be triple-gold level, but it will certainly do what you intend to do. The thing that will confound that is whether you get into -18 dB/octave 3rd order filters as opposed to -12 dB/octave 2nd order, or even softer -6 dB/octave first order configurations. Essentially ... if the cost of doing a -6 dB/octave crossover is $50 (arbitrary), then a -12 dB/octave will be $85 and the -18 dB/octave will get to $140 or higher. Your mileage may vary.

This is one of the "other' reasons it has become popular to "bi-amp" or "tri-amp". Far less expensive (even for quite sophisticated circuitry) to do the cross-overs before amplification. Simplest reason in the world: power. Lower power = cheaper (smaller) components. It also often equates to more linear device response. It also results in more control over things that, when power is involved, stop responding in their "textbook" fashion.

Now... if you really delve in and get into winding your own inductors, you can go to high "filter orders" (like -18 dB/octave), much more cheaply than buying all the components. It just takes time, patience, and time. And patience. It can be especially easy though, if you invest in "one kind" of inductor frame, like the "C" or "R" core. They come in standard sizes, and if you get the metal-clamping tools and bobbins for windings, you can cook up some wicked inductors. A formula, a bobbin, some wire, a core, strapping, crimp tool, and a "counter chuck" (they're cheap) to get the number of turns right. An electric drill, some special "never gums up in a lifetime of service" tape, and you're off to the land of self-made premium inductors. The capacitors, leave for someone else to make. Resistors, ditto.

Once you make the low-end cross-overs, you can mount them inside the speaker, and use a DPDT toggle switch to either switch in the low-hi Xover or bypass it entirely. Very convenient for testing the A/B case after you build the crossover from the research settings.

GoatGuy

[RickDangerous]

Ok, i am learning a lot, thank you for taking the time to spread the knowledge.
Making the inductors sounds feasible, indeed. Something i will look into! Especially as i guess that stronger slopes make for better filters, such as 4th order 24dB/octave, which you don't mention so i'd imagine they cost an arm & a leg.

Thanks once again Mr GoatGuy.

Where the heck does that name come from?
Hmm...i'm not sure i want to know! ;-p