Put it another way - Can the best passive beat the best active? what can take a lot of experimentation and effort to achieve passively can immediately be achieved using an active setup. And you can achieve far more actively than passively. There is no worry about impedance of the drivers, the crossover performance doesnt vary and you can do time alignment too when you use a digital active xover. I dont see how it can be argued otherwise.
so is it just because a passive speaker is easier to market to the public? what do you guys think?
so is it just because a passive speaker is easier to market to the public? what do you guys think?
Suggest you look at this thread for all the answers:
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/221643-active-vrs-passive.html
Been discussed many times in these pages. We don't need another thread.
http://www.diyaudio.com/forums/multi-way/221643-active-vrs-passive.html
Been discussed many times in these pages. We don't need another thread.
And in addition I would say, if you do use an active crossover, speaker design is childs play. All you need to do is select your choice of drivers and put them in a box and away you go. The only problem is the bass loading. But the mids and tweeter is just plug and play. people try to make it look like speaker design is hard yet there is nothing more to it than that!
- Status
- Not open for further replies.